# United States v. Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · December 1, 2008 · 301 F. App'x 203

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1027327

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lamont Donte BROWN, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** December 1, 2008
- **Citations:** 301 F. App'x 203
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Motz, Gregory, Hamilton
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1027327

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-7256

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

LAMONT DONTE BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:02-cr-00178-RAJ-JEB-9)

Submitted: November 20, 2008 Decided: December 1, 2008

Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lamont Donte Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Darryl James Mitchell,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Lamont Donte Brown appeals the district court’s order

denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) 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. Brown, No. 2:02-cr-00178-RAJ-

JEB-9 (E.D. Va. filed June 13, 2008; entered June 16, 2008). 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1027327. Public record. Not legal advice.