U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2009

United States v. Spratley

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided February 13, 2009 · Hamilton, King, Niemeyer, Per Curiam

311 F. App'x 603

Counsel

Clarence Spratley, Appellant Pro Se. David Novak, Office of the United States Attorney, Elizabeth Wu, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Clarence Spratley appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Spratley, No. 3:95-cr-00008-RLW-1 (E.D.Va. Aug. 25, 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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.