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)
12-6856•United States of America v. Kevin Langston, a/k/a Little One
12-6856Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 2, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6856
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
KEVIN LANGSTON, a/k/a Little One,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District
Judge. (3:03-cr-00394-JRS-26)
Submitted: September 27, 2012 Decided: October 2, 2012
Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kevin Langston, Appellant Pro Se. Roderick Charles Young,
Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Kevin Langston 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. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Langston, No. 3:03-cr-00394-JRS-26 (E.D. Va. Apr. 17,
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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.