Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 49 views

    United States v. Linwood Kenny, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Linwood Gerald Kenny appealed a district court's denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Linwood Kenny, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    49 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which Linwood Gerald Kenny appealed a district court's denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-12-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-7371

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a court case in which Linwood Gerald Kenny appealed a district court's denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    49 views2 pages

    United States v. Linwood Kenny, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Linwood Gerald Kenny appealed a district court's denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's ruling for the reasons stated. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 12-7371

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    LINWOOD GERALD KENNY,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
    Frank D. Whitney,
    District Judge. (3:01-cr-00185-FDW-1)

    Submitted:

    December 13, 2012

    Decided:

    December 18, 2012

    Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Linwood Gerald Kenney, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Linwood

    Gerald

    Kenny

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order denying his 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion.

    We have

    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly,

    we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.


    States

    v.

    2012).
    legal
    before

    Kenny,

    No.

    3:01-cr-00185-FDW-1

    (W.D.N.C.

    United
    Aug.

    3,

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and


    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like