Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4 views

    United States v. Ward, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    George Allen Ward appealed the district court's denial of his motions to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582(c) and compel the government to file a motion under Rule 35(b). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its decision. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    United States v. Ward, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    George Allen Ward appealed the district court's denial of his motions to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582(c) and compel the government to file a motion under Rule 35(b). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its decision. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-05-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-6064

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    George Allen Ward appealed the district court's denial of his motions to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582(c) and compel the government to file a motion under Rule 35(b). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its decision. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    4 views2 pages

    United States v. Ward, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    George Allen Ward appealed the district court's denial of his motions to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582(c) and compel the government to file a motion under Rule 35(b). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its decision. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 07-6064

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    GEORGE ALLEN WARD,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Newport News. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr.,
    Senior District Judge. (4:94-cr-00070-HCM)

    Submitted: April 26, 2007

    Decided: May 2, 2007

    Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    George Allen Ward, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    George Allen Ward seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying his motions for reduction of sentence under 18
    U.S.C.A. 3582(c) (West 2000 & Supp. 2006), and to compel the
    government to file a motion under Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b).
    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We have

    Accordingly, we

    affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States
    v. Ward, No. 4:94-cr-00070-HCM (E.D. Va. Nov. 17, 2006).

    We

    dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
    are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
    argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    - 2 -

    You might also like