# United States v. Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · February 25, 2009

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1027954

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** February 25, 2009
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **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/1027954

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8156

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMES EDWARD BROWN, a/k/a JB,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (8:97-cr-00170-GRA-4)

Submitted: February 19, 2009 Decided: February 25, 2009

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Edward Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Jean Howard,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

James Edward Brown appeals the district court order

denying his motion to reconsider the order denying his motion to

reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We

have reviewed the record and Brown’s contentions on appeal and

find the district court did not abuse its discretion denying the

motion. See United States v. Goines, 357 F.3d 469, 478 (4th

Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. See United States v. Brown, No. 8:97-cr-

00170-GRA-4 (D.S.C. Sept. 19, 2008). We grant Brown’s motion to

proceed in forma pauperis. 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/1027954. Public record. Not legal advice.