Filed: Sep. 24, 2020
Latest Update: Sep. 24, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6044 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CHRISTOPHER JUNIOR RANDALL, a/k/a Chris, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, Senior District Judge. (4:06-cr-00583-TLW-1) Submitted: September 22, 2020 Decided: September 24, 2020 Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinio
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6044 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CHRISTOPHER JUNIOR RANDALL, a/k/a Chris, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, Senior District Judge. (4:06-cr-00583-TLW-1) Submitted: September 22, 2020 Decided: September 24, 2020 Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-6044
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CHRISTOPHER JUNIOR RANDALL, a/k/a Chris,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.
Terry L. Wooten, Senior District Judge. (4:06-cr-00583-TLW-1)
Submitted: September 22, 2020 Decided: September 24, 2020
Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christopher Junior Randall, Appellant Pro Se. Everett E. McMillian, Assistant United
States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Florence, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Christopher J. Randall appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion
seeking a sentence reduction pursuant to the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391,
§ 404, 132 Stat. 5194, 5222. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Randall,
No. 4:06-cr-00583-TLW-1 (D.S.C. Dec. 17, 2019). We deny Randall’s motion for the
appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2