Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 7 views

    United States v. Daniel, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Hernandez Daniel's motion to amend his sentence. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the reasons provided by the district court in its June 15, 2009 decision. As the facts and legal arguments were clearly presented in the case materials, the Court of Appeals dispensed with oral arguments.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Daniel, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Hernandez Daniel's motion to amend his sentence. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the reasons provided by the district court in its June 15, 2009 decision. As the facts and legal arguments were clearly presented in the case materials, the Court of Appeals dispensed with oral arguments.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-10-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-7214

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Hernandez Daniel's motion to amend his sentence. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the reasons provided by the district court in its June 15, 2009 decision. As the facts and legal arguments were clearly presented in the case materials, the Court of Appeals dispensed with oral arguments.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Daniel, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Hernandez Daniel's motion to amend his sentence. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the reasons provided by the district court in its June 15, 2009 decision. As the facts and legal arguments were clearly presented in the case materials, the Court of Appeals dispensed with oral arguments.

    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. 09-7214

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    HERNANDEZ DANIEL,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
    District Judge. (3:08-CR-00248-RLW-1)

    Submitted:

    September 29, 2009

    Decided:

    October 8, 2009

    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Hernandez
    Assistant
    Appellee.

    Daniel,
    United

    Appellant Pro Se.


    John Staige Davis, V,
    States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Hernandez

    Daniel

    appeals

    the

    district

    denying his motion to amend the sentence.


    record and find no reversible error.

    courts

    order

    We have reviewed the

    Accordingly, we affirm for

    the reasons stated by the district court.

    See United States v.

    Daniel, No. 3:08-CR-00248-RLW-1 (E.D. Va. June 15, 2009).


    dispense

    with

    oral

    argument

    because

    the

    facts

    and

    We

    legal

    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the


    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like