History
  • No items yet
midpage
United States v. William Marshall
670 F. App'x 76
| 4th Cir. | 2016
|
Check Treatment
|
Docket

*1 Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Justin Marshall, Appellant Pro Se. Jane Barrett Taylor, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina; Leesa Washington, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. *2 PER CURIAM:

William Justin Marshall appeals the district court’s order dismissing his pro se 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Marshall, No. 3:06-cr-00562- CMC-1 (D.S.C. June 14, 2016). 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

2

Case Details

Case Name: United States v. William Marshall
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date Published: Oct 21, 2016
Citation: 670 F. App'x 76
Docket Number: 16-6882
Court Abbreviation: 4th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.