Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Howard, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    Nathan Loyal Howard appealed the district court's denial of his motion to modify or reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appeals court reviewed the record and district court opinion adopting the magistrate's recommendation, and determined the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented without requiring oral arguments. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to deny Howard's motion to modify his sentence.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-06-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-6112

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Nathan Loyal Howard appealed the district court's denial of his motion to modify or reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appeals court reviewed the record and district court opinion adopting the magistrate's recommendation, and determined the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented without requiring oral arguments. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to deny Howard's motion to modify his sentence.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Howard, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Nathan Loyal Howard appealed the district court's denial of his motion to modify or reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appeals court reviewed the record and district court opinion adopting the magistrate's recommendation, and determined the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented without requiring oral arguments. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to deny Howard's motion to modify his sentence.

    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. 97-6112

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    NATHAN LOYAL HOWARD, a/k/a Nathan Hale,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, District
    Judge. (CR-94-26, CA-96-415-1)
    Submitted:

    May 15, 1997

    Decided:

    June 3, 1997

    Before RUSSELL, HALL, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Nathan Loyal Howard, Appellant Pro Se. John Castle Parr, OFFICE
    OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying
    his motion filed under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (1994), to modify or
    reduce his sentence. We have reviewed the record and the district
    court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate
    judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the
    reasoning of the district court. United States v. Howard, Nos. CR94-26; CA-96-415-1 (S.D.W. Va. Dec. 13, 1996). 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