Categories: Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions

U.S. v. KNOX, 339 Fed.Appx. 293 (4th Cir. 2009)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Byron Joseph KNOX, a/k/a Bryon Joseph Knox, a/k/a Joe Knox, a/k/a Fort Knox, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 09-6420.United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.Submitted: July 30, 2009.
Decided: August 5, 2009.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:98-cr-00192-RLV-1).

Byron Joseph Knox, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Page 294

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Byron Joseph Knox appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Knox, No. 5:98-cr-00192-RLV-1 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 3, 2009). We deny Knox’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.

jdjungle