US v. Deryck Halley

Filing 920100126

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6798

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff ­ Appellee, v. DERYCK LENNOX HALLEY, Defendant ­ Appellant.

No. 08-6851

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff ­ Appellee, v. DERYCK LENNOX HALLEY, Defendant ­ Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (7:89-cr-00115-jct-1)

Submitted:

January 19, 2010

Decided:

January 26, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Deryck Lennox Halley, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

PER CURIAM: In Appeal No. 08-6798, Deryck Lennox Halley appeals the district court's order denying his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). In Appeal

No. 08-6851, Halley appeals the district court's subsequently filed amended judgment denying the same motion. have been consolidated. The two appeals

Because the district court's amended

judgment supersedes the court's previous order denying Halley's § 3582(c)(2) motion, we dismiss Halley's appeal of the previous order as moot. With respect to Halley's appeal of the district

court's amended judgment, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons United States v. Halley, No. We dispense with contentions the court are and

stated by the district court.

7:89-cr-00115-jct-1 (W.D. Va. May 13, 2008). oral argument because in the the facts and legal

adequately

presented

materials

before

argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART

3