Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 9 views

    United States v. Jermaine Wood, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Jermaine Lamont Wood's appeal of a district court order denying his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented, and argument would not aid in the decision.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    United States v. Jermaine Wood, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Jermaine Lamont Wood's appeal of a district court order denying his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented, and argument would not aid in the decision.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-11-25 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-7071

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Jermaine Lamont Wood's appeal of a district court order denying his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented, and argument would not aid in the decision.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Jermaine Wood, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Jermaine Lamont Wood's appeal of a district court order denying his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the record. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented, and argument 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. 14-7071

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    JERMAINE LAMONT WOOD,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    James R. Spencer, Senior
    District Judge. (3:99-cr-00144-JRS-1)

    Submitted:

    November 20, 2014

    Decided:

    November 25, 2014

    Before KING and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Jermaine Lamont Wood, Appellant Pro Se. Peter Sinclair Duffey,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Jermaine
    order

    denying

    Lamont

    his

    motion

    Wood

    appeals

    for

    the

    reduction

    pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (2012).


    record and find no reversible error.

    of

    No.

    dispense

    3:99-cr-00144-JRS-1
    with

    contentions

    are

    oral

    argument

    adequately

    (E.D.

    sentence

    filed

    Accordingly, we affirm for

    Va.

    because

    presented

    courts

    We have reviewed the

    the reasons stated by the district court.


    Wood,

    district

    in

    June
    the
    the

    United States v.
    18,
    facts

    2014).

    We

    and

    legal

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like