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)
11-6106•United States of America v. Kingdawud Mujahid Burgess, a/k/a David Clifton Burgess
11-6106Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 24, 2011
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6106
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KINGDAWUD MUJAHID BURGESS, a/k/a David Clifton Burgess,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District
Judge. (1:06-cr-00429-GBL-1)
Submitted: May 19, 2011 Decided: May 24, 2011
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit
Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kingdawud Mujahid Burgess, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Michael
Fitzpatrick, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Kingdawud Mujahid Burgess appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006). We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Burgess,
No. 1:06-cr-00429-GBL-1 (E.D. Va. Dec. 22, 2010). 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.