Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    United States v. Eustach, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Ronald Eustach appealed the district court's partial granting and partial denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The court affirmed the district court's decision.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    United States v. Eustach, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Ronald Eustach appealed the district court's partial granting and partial denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The court affirmed the district court's decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-09-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-6565

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Ronald Eustach appealed the district court's partial granting and partial denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The court affirmed the district court's decision.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Eustach, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Ronald Eustach appealed the district court's partial granting and partial denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The court affirmed the district court's 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. 09-6565

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    RONALD EUSTACH, a/k/a Tony Stracan,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Florence.
    Cameron McGowan Currie, District
    Judge. (4:00-cr-00067-CMC-2)

    Submitted:

    September 10, 2009

    Decided:

    September 14, 2009

    Before KING, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Ronald Eustach, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred W. Bethea, OFFICE OF


    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Florence, South Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Ronald

    Eustach

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    granting in part and denying in part his 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2)


    (2006) motion for reduction of sentence.
    record and find no reversible error.

    We have reviewed the

    Accordingly, we affirm for

    the reasons stated by the district court.

    United States v.

    Eustach, No. 4:00-cr-00067-CMC-2 (D.S.C. Mar. 13, 2009).


    dispense

    with

    oral

    argument

    because

    the

    facts

    and

    We
    legal

    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the


    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like