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)
17-6666•United States of America v. Elizabeth Marie Rushing
17-6666Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 3, 2017
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-6666
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ELIZABETH MARIE RUSHING,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina,
at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:00-cr-00008-FDW-7)
Submitted: September 28, 2017 Decided: October 3, 2017
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Elizabeth Marie Rushing-Floyd, Appellant Pro Se. Gill Paul Beck, Sr., Assistant United
States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina; William A. Brafford, Jonathan Henry Ferry,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Tiffany Mallory Moore, Jennifer A.
Youngs, Assistant United States Attorneys, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Elizabeth Rushing appeals the district court’s order denying her motion for
modification 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.
Rushing, No. 3:00-cr-00008-FDW-7 (W.D.N.C. Dec. 21, 2016). We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.