Scribd
Upload
20 views2 pages

United States v. Wilson, 4th Cir. (2010)

Rodney Wilson appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and determined the district court provided adequate reasons for denying the motion to reduce Wilson's sentence.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
20 views2 pages

United States v. Wilson, 4th Cir. (2010)

Rodney Wilson appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and determined the district court provided adequate reasons for denying the motion to reduce Wilson's sentence.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7892

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RODNEY WILSON,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Danville.
Norman K. Moon, District
Judge. (4:03-cr-70134-nkm-mfu-3)

Submitted:

January 19, 2010

Decided:

January 28, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rodney Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, Assistant


United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:
Rodney

Wilson

appeals

the

district

courts

order

denying his motion for a reduction of sentence filed pursuant to


18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (2006).

We have reviewed the record and

find the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying
the motion.

See United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th

Cir. 2004) (motion under 3582(c) is subject to the discretion


of the district court); United States v. Legree, 205 F.3d 724,
727 (4th Cir. 2000).

Thus, we affirm the district courts order

for the reasons stated there.

See United States v. Wilson, No.

4:03-cr-70134-nkm-mfu-3 (W.D. Va. Sept. 24, 2009).

We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately

presented

in

the

materials

before

the

court

and

argument would not aid the decisional process.


AFFIRMED

You might also like