United States of America v. Patrick Kit Plumlee; Max Orvel Plumlee

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6857
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
PATRICK KIT PLUMLEE; MAX ORVEL PLUMLEE,
Defendants - Appellants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson,
District Judge. (4:94-cr-00002-1; 4:94-cr-00002-2)
Submitted: March 6, 2009 Decided: March 19, 2009
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Patrick Kit Plumlee, Max Orvel Plumlee, Appellants Pro Se.
Kevin Michael Comstock, Assistant United States Attorney,
Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Patrick Kit Plumlee and Max Orvel Plumlee appeal the
district court’s orders denying relief on their motion for
reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
(2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. United States v. Plumlee, Nos. 4:94-cr-00002-1;
4:94-cr-00002-2 (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 10, 2008; entered Apr. 11,
2008).* 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
* The Plumlees’ claim that they were entitled to appointed
counsel in their § 3582(c) proceeding, to the extent it was
requested below and denied by the district court, is without
merit, as there is no constitutional right to counsel in a
proceeding under § 3582(c). See United States v. Legree, 205
F.3d 724, 730 (4th Cir. 2000).

-- 2 of 2 --