Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Burress, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    Nathaniel Burress appealed the district court's orders granting his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) but denying his amended motion. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It affirmed the district court's orders, finding that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented to the court. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, determining they would not aid in the decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-07-15 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-7461

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Nathaniel Burress appealed the district court's orders granting his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) but denying his amended motion. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It affirmed the district court's orders, finding that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented to the court. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, determining they would not aid in the 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. Burress, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Nathaniel Burress appealed the district court's orders granting his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) but denying his amended motion. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It affirmed the district court's orders, finding that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented to the court. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, determining they would not aid in the 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 09-7461

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    NATHANIEL BURRESS,
    Defendant Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Wheeling.
    Frederick P. Stamp,
    Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:04-cr-00031-FPS-JES-1)

    Submitted:

    June 24, 2010

    Decided:

    July 15, 2010

    Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Brendan S. Leary, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Wheeling,


    West Virginia, for Appellant.
    Randolph John Bernard, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Nathaniel Burress appeals the district courts orders
    granting his 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for sentence
    reduction, and denying his amended 3582(c)(2) motion.
    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We have

    Accordingly,

    we deny Burresss motions for appointment of counsel and affirm


    the

    district

    courts

    orders.

    United

    States

    v.

    Burress,

    No.

    5:04-cr-00031-FPS-JES-1 (N.D. W. Va. July 17, 2009; Dec. 22,


    2009).
    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