Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 7 views

    United States v. Terrell, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Brooks James Terrell appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, agreeing with the reasons cited by the lower court for denying the motion. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    United States v. Terrell, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    Brooks James Terrell appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, agreeing with the reasons cited by the lower court for denying the motion. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-04-11 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-6165

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Brooks James Terrell appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, agreeing with the reasons cited by the lower court for denying the motion. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Terrell, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Brooks James Terrell appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, agreeing with the reasons cited by the lower court for denying the motion. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court 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. 06-6165

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    BROOKS JAMES TERRELL,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
    Judge. (CR-99-610-HMH)

    Submitted:

    March 23, 2007

    Decided:

    April 11, 2007

    Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Brooks James Terrell, Appellant Pro Se. David Calhoun Stephens,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Brooks James Terrell appeals the district court order
    denying his motion for a reduction to his sentence under 18 U.S.C.
    3582(c) (2000).

    We have reviewed the record and the district

    courts order and affirm for the reasons cited by the district
    court.

    See United States v. Terrell, No. CR-99-610-HMH (D.S.C.

    Dec. 9, 2005).

    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like