Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
09-7681•United States of America v. Rodney Edward Wall, a/k/a Sld Dft 3:99-24-9, a/k/a Big Rodney
09-7681Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit24.02.2010
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7681
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
RODNEY EDWARD WALL, a/k/a Sld Dft 3:99-24-9, a/k/a Big
Rodney,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney,
District Judge. (3:99-cr-00024-FDW-9)
Submitted: February 18, 2009 Decided: February 24, 2010
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rodney Edward Wall, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray,
Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Rodney Edward Wall appeals the district court’s order
denying Wall’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Wall, No. 3:99-cr-00024-FDW-9 (W.D.N.C. Aug, 31,
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
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.