Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Ronald Evans, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    Ronald Evans appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It affirmed the district court's order denying the sentence reduction based on U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.10(b)(2), which prohibits reducing a sentence below the minimum of the amended guideline range. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-07-24 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 15-6686

    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 Evans appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It affirmed the district court's order denying the sentence reduction based on U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.10(b)(2), which prohibits reducing a sentence below the minimum of the amended guideline range. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Ronald Evans, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Ronald Evans appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It affirmed the district court's order denying the sentence reduction based on U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.10(b)(2), which prohibits reducing a sentence below the minimum of the amended guideline range. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the 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. 15-6686

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    RONALD EVANS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
    Judge. (2:06-cr-00162-RAJ-JEB-7)

    Submitted:

    July 21, 2015

    Decided:

    July 24, 2015

    Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Ronald Evans, Appellant Pro Se. Sherrie Scott Capotosto, Joseph


    Evan DePadilla, Assistant United States Attorneys, Norfolk,
    Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Ronald Evans appeals the district courts orders denying his
    motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2)
    (2012).

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we affirm the district courts order.

    See United

    States v. Evans, No. 2:06-cr-00162-RAJ-JEB-7 (E.D. Va. Mar. 16,


    2015); see also U.S Sentencing Guidelines Manual 1B1.10(b)(2),
    p.s. (2014).

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

    legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before


    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like