Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 0 views

    United States v. Coward, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court's denial of Calvin Coward's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court also denied Coward's request for appointment of counsel and affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its August 6, 2009 opinion.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    United States v. Coward, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court's denial of Calvin Coward's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court also denied Coward's request for appointment of counsel and affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its August 6, 2009 opinion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-11-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-7521

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court's denial of Calvin Coward's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court also denied Coward's request for appointment of counsel and affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its August 6, 2009 opinion.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Coward, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court's denial of Calvin Coward's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court also denied Coward's request for appointment of counsel and affirmed the district court's ruling for the reasons stated in its August 6, 2009 opinion.

    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. 09-7521

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    CALVIN ANGELO COWARD,
    Defendant Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Greenville.
    Malcolm J. Howard,
    Senior District Judge. (4:90-cr-00052-H-2)

    Submitted:

    September 30, 2009

    Decided:

    November 20, 2009

    Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Calvin Angelo Coward, Appellant Pro Se.


    Anne Margaret Hayes,
    Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys,
    Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Calvin

    Angelo

    Coward

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order denying his motion for a reduction of sentence under 18


    U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (2006).
    find no reversible error.

    We have reviewed the record and


    Accordingly, we deny Cowards motion

    for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by


    the district court.

    See United States v. Coward, No. 4:90-cr-

    00052-H-2

    Aug.

    (E.D.N.C.

    6,

    2009).

    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

    You might also like