Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 views

    United States v. Shawn Harris, 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 Shawn Keith Harris's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court also denied Harris's motion for a transcript at the government's expense and dispensed with oral argument, finding 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. Shawn Harris, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Shawn Keith Harris's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court also denied Harris's motion for a transcript at the government's expense and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-10-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-6232

    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 Shawn Keith Harris's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court also denied Harris's motion for a transcript at the government's expense and dispensed with oral argument, finding 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
    1 views2 pages

    United States v. Shawn Harris, 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 Shawn Keith Harris's motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court also denied Harris's motion for a transcript at the government's expense and dispensed with oral argument, finding 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. 12-6232

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    SHAWN KEITH HARRIS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
    Richard L.
    Voorhees, District Judge. (5:02-cr-00005-RLV-4)

    Submitted:

    September 17, 2012

    Decided:

    October 2, 2012

    Before DIAZ, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Shawn Keith Harris, Appellant Pro Se.


    Amy Elizabeth Ray,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Shawn Keith Harris appeals the district courts order
    denying relief under 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.


    States

    v.

    2012).

    Harris,

    No.

    5:02-cr-00005-RLV-4

    (W.D.N.C.

    United

    Jan.

    24,

    We deny the motion for transcript at the government's

    expense and we dispense with oral argument because the facts and
    legal
    before

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like