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)
09-7083•United States of America v. Eric Costino Sharpe
09-7083Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 5, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7083
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
ERIC COSTINO SHARPE,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:04-cr-00190-BO-1)
Submitted: October 30, 2009 Decided: November 5, 2009
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eric Costino Sharpe, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Jack Higdon, Jr.,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Eric Costino Sharpe appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion to modify his sentence 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. See United States v. Sharpe, No.
5:04-cr-00190-BO-1 (E.D.N.C. filed June 2, 2009; entered
June 3, 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.