Opinion

United States v. Randolph

  • 380 F. App'x 314
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Filed
May 27, 2010
Status
Published
On the bench
Davis, Niemeyer, Wilkinson
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Vernell Brown Randolph appeals the district court’s order denying relief on her third motion for reduction of sentence filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm *315 for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Randolph, No. 4:04-cr-00024-JBF-TEM-1 (E.D.Va. Jan. 6, 2010). We deny Randolph’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.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.