Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 views

    United States v. Bey, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding defendant Damian Bey's appeal of a district court order denying his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Bey's motion to hold his appeal in abeyance pending a Supreme Court decision.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    United States v. Bey, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding defendant Damian Bey's appeal of a district court order denying his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Bey's motion to hold his appeal in abeyance pending a Supreme Court decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-04-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-7772

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding defendant Damian Bey's appeal of a district court order denying his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Bey's motion to hold his appeal in abeyance pending a Supreme Court decision.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Bey, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding defendant Damian Bey's appeal of a district court order denying his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Bey's motion to hold his appeal in abeyance pending a Supreme Court decision.

    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. 09-7772

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    DAMIAN G. BEY,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    W. Earl Britt, Senior
    District Judge. (5:03-cr-00252-BR-1)

    Submitted:

    March 22, 2010

    Decided:

    April 8, 2010

    Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Damian G. Bey, Appellant Pro Se.


    Ethan A. Ontjes, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Damian
    denying

    his

    Giovanni

    motion

    for

    U.S.C. 3582(c) (2006).


    no reversible error.

    Bey

    appeals

    sentence

    (E.D.N.C.

    district

    reduction

    court

    filed

    order

    under

    18

    We have reviewed the record and find

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons


    United States v. Bey, No. 5:03-

    stated by the district court.


    cr-00252-BR-1

    Aug.

    27,

    2009).

    We

    also

    deny

    Beys

    motion to hold his appeal in abeyance pending the United States


    Supreme Courts decision in United States v. Dillon, No. 096338.
    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and


    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like