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)
12-6354•United States of America v. David Servin-Terrasas, a/k/a David Servin
12-6354Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 26, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6354
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DAVID SERVIN-TERRASAS, a/k/a David Servin,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (4:06-cr-00004-JLK-1)
Submitted: June 21, 2012 Decided: June 26, 2012
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Servin-Terrasas, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew
Bassford, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
David Servin-Terrasas appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion seeking leave to renew his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for a reduction of his sentence. 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. Servin-Terrasas, No. 4:06-cr-00004-
JLK-1 (W.D. Va. Feb. 6, 2012).∗ 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
∗ To the extent Servin-Terrasas sought a motion to
reconsider the court’s earlier denial of his § 3582 motion, such
a motion would be improper. See United States v. Goodwyn, 596
F.3d 233, 235–36 (4th Cir.) (noting that a motion to reconsider
is not a proper vehicle to seek review of a ruling on a § 3582
motion), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 3530 (2010).
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.