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)
09-6866•United States of America v. Robert Madison Brooks, a/k/a Pooh
09-6866Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 15, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6866
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ROBERT MADISON BROOKS, a/k/a Pooh,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (0:02-cr-01173-JFA-2)
Submitted: September 10, 2009 Decided: September 15, 2009
Before KING, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Madison Brooks, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Robert Madison Brooks appeals the district court’s
order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error and affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. United States v.
Brooks, No. 0:02-cr-01173-JFA-2 (D.S.C. Apr. 28, 2009). Brooks’
claim that the court could have resentenced him below the
Sentencing Guidelines is foreclosed by this court’s opinion in
United States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247 (4th Cir.), cert denied,
129 S. Ct. 2401 (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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.