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)
09-7873•United States of America v. Julian Grant Childs, a/k/a Poncho
09-7873Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 25, 2010
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7873
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JULIAN GRANT CHILDS, a/k/a Poncho,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (3:05-cr-00249-RLW-1)
Submitted: February 18, 2010 Decided: February 25, 2010
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Julian Grant Childs, Appellant Pro Se. Gurney Wingate Grant,
II, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Julian Grant Childs appeals the district court’s order
denying his pro se motion to compel the Government to file a
motion for sentence reduction pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P.
35(b). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See
United States v. Childs, No. 3:05-cr-00249-RLW-1 (E.D. Va.
Sept. 8, 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.