# United States v. Julius Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · February 21, 2012

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/623217

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** February 21, 2012
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished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/623217

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7188

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

JULIUS BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District
Judge. (1:00-cr-00100-WDQ-2)

Submitted: February 13, 2012 Decided: February 21, 2012

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Julius Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Slaymaker Sale,
Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Julius Brown appeals the district court’s order

denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction

of sentence. In his motion, Brown sought the benefit of

Amendments 591 and 599 of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines.

Amendments 591 and 599 became effective on November 1, 2000, and

were incorporated into the 2000 version of the U.S. Sentencing

Guidelines Manual, pursuant to which Brown’s Guidelines range

was calculated. As such, he received the benefit of Amendments

591 and 599 at the time of sentencing in August 2001, and his

§ 3582(c)(2) motion was properly denied. Accordingly, we

affirm. 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/623217. Public record. Not legal advice.