Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. de Los Santos-Mora, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. It states that Ricardo Antonio De Los Santos-Mora appealed a district court order that denied his motion to reconsider the reduction of his sentence under a Rule 35(b) motion by the government. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's reasoning and ruling. The appeals court decided the case without oral arguments, as the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-06-25 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 99-6518

    Original Title

    United States v. De Los Santos-Mora, 4th Cir. (1999)

    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 summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. It states that Ricardo Antonio De Los Santos-Mora appealed a district court order that denied his motion to reconsider the reduction of his sentence under a Rule 35(b) motion by the government. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's reasoning and ruling. The appeals court decided the case without oral arguments, as the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. de Los Santos-Mora, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. It states that Ricardo Antonio De Los Santos-Mora appealed a district court order that denied his motion to reconsider the reduction of his sentence under a Rule 35(b) motion by the government. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so it affirmed the district court's reasoning and ruling. The appeals court decided the case without oral arguments, as the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately presented 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. 99-6518

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    RICARDO ANTONIO DE LOS SANTOS-MORA,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-96-49)

    Submitted:

    June 17, 1999

    Decided:

    June 25, 1999

    Before MURNAGHAN and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Ricardo Antonio De Los Santos-Mora, Appellant Pro Se.
    Robert
    Edward Bradenham, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk,
    Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Ricardo

    Antonio

    De

    Los

    Santos-Mora

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts order denying his motion for reconsideration of the district courts order reducing his sentence pursuant to the Governments Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b) motion.

    We have reviewed the record

    and the district courts opinion and find no reversible error.


    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
    United States v. De Los Santos-Mora, No. CR-96-49 (E.D. Va. Mar.
    26, 1999).

    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