United States of America v. Benjamin Lee Stowers, a/k/a Benji Stowers

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6661
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BENJAMIN LEE STOWERS, a/k/a Benji Stowers,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 16-6667
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TRAVIS LEE JONES,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 16-6708
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,

-- 1 of 4 --

2
v.
CHAD DAVID ROBINSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 16-6782
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ROBERT LEE BENNETT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at
Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, Chief District Judge. (7:11-cr-00053-GEC-1; 7:11-cr-00039-
GEC-RSB-6; 7:12-cr-00015-GEC-3; 7:09-cr-00045-GEC-1)
Submitted: June 28, 2017 Decided: July 20, 2017
Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Larry W. Shelton, Federal Public Defender, Christine Madeleine Lee, Assistant Federal
Public Defender, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellants. John P. Fishwick, Jr., United States
Attorney, Jean B. Hudson, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for
Appellee.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 3 of 4 --

4
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Benjamin Lee Stowers, Travis Lee Jones, Chad
David Robinson, and Robert Lee Bennett appeal the district court’s orders denying their
motions to reduce sentence. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on
appeal and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. United States v. Jones, No. 7:11-cr-00039-GEC-RSB-6 (W.D. Va. May 11,
2016); United States v. Robinson, No. 7:12-cr-00015-GEC-3 (W.D. Va. May 10, 2016);
United States v. Bennett, No. 7:09-cr-00045-GEC-1 (W.D. Va. May 10, 2016); United
States v. Stowers, No. 7:11-cr-00053-GEC-1 (W.D. Va. May 9, 2016). We deny as moot
the pending motion to place this case in abeyance and 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

-- 4 of 4 --