The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
08-8321•United States of America v. Clarence J. Lomax
08-8321Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 26, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-8321
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
CLARENCE J. LOMAX,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (3:00-cr-00406-RLW-1)
Submitted: February 19, 2009 Decided: February 26, 2009
Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Clarence J. Lomax, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Ronald Gill,
Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Clarence J. Lomax appeals the district court’s order
denying the his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for
reduction of sentence pursuant to Amendments 706 and 711 of the
U.S. 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. Lomax,
No. 3:00-cr-00406-RLW-1 (E.D. Va. Oct. 10, 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.