Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4 views

    United States v. Terry Nisewarner, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Terry Alan Nisewarner's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the 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

    You might also like

    United States v. Terry Nisewarner, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Terry Alan Nisewarner's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-07-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-6623

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Terry Alan Nisewarner's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the 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
    4 views2 pages

    United States v. Terry Nisewarner, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Terry Alan Nisewarner's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the 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. 12-6623

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    TERRY ALAN NISEWARNER,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda Wright Allen, District
    Judge. (2:99-cr-00080-AWA-1)

    Submitted:

    July 19, 2012

    Decided:

    July 26, 2012

    Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Terry Alan Nisewarner, Appellant Pro Se.


    Laura Pellatiro
    Tayman,
    Assistant
    United
    States
    Attorney,
    Newport
    News,
    Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Terry

    Alan

    Nisewarner

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order denying relief on his motion seeking a reduction in his


    sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (2006).
    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We have

    Accordingly,

    we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

    United

    States v. Nisewarner, No. 2:99-cr-00080-AWA-1 (E.D. Va. Mar. 12,


    2012).
    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