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)
12-6993•United States of America v. William Teek Brim, Jr.
12-6993Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 2, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6993
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
WILLIAM TEEK BRIM, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
Chief District Judge. (1:07-cr-00247-JAB-1)
Submitted: October 18, 2012 Decided: November 2, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Teek Brim, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Robert Michael
Hamilton, Assistant United States Attorney, Randall Stuart
Galyon, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
William Teek Brim, Jr., appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion for reduction of sentence. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Brim, No. 1:07-cr-00247-JAB-1 (M.D.N.C. May 21, 2012).
We deny Brim’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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.