Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 12 views

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    David Corey Johnson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Johnson's motion for appointment of counsel, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately represented 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. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    12 views2 pages
    David Corey Johnson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Johnson's motion for appointment of counsel, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately represented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-03-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 08-8163

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    David Corey Johnson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Johnson's motion for appointment of counsel, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately represented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    David Corey Johnson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Johnson's motion for appointment of counsel, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately represented 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. 08-8163

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    DAVID COREY JOHNSON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    Robert E. Payne, Senior
    District Judge. (3:01-cr-00117-REP-1)

    Submitted:

    March 17, 2009

    Decided:

    March 20, 2009

    Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Robert J. Wagner, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Richmond,


    Virginia, for Appellant. James Brien Comey, Jr., OFFICE OF THE
    UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, John Staige Davis, V, Brian Ronald Hood,
    Assistant United States Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    David Corey Johnson appeals the district courts order
    denying his 18 U.S.C. 3582(c) (2006) motion.
    the record and find no reversible error.

    We have reviewed

    Accordingly, we affirm

    for the reasons stated by the district court.

    United States v.

    Johnson, No. 3:01-cr-00117-REP-1 (E.D. Va. Sept. 22, 2008).


    deny Johnsons motion for appointment of counsel.

    We

    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