US v. Michael Lee
Filing
402866568
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [998311667-2]. Originating case number: 5:01-cr-00221-H-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998369499] [10-6069]
<![CDATA[
US v. Michael Lee
Doc. 402866568
Case: 10-6069
Document: 25
Date Filed: 06/29/2010
Page: 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6069
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. MICHAEL ANTRANTRINO LEE, Defendant Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:01-cr-00221-H-1)
Submitted:
June 16, 2010
Decided:
June 29, 2010
Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Antrantrino Lee, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Dockets.Justia.com
Case: 10-6069
Document: 25
Date Filed: 06/29/2010
Page: 2
PER CURIAM: Michael Antrantrino Lee appeals the district court's order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion. have reviewed the record and find no reversible We
error.
Accordingly, we deny Lee's motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Lee, No. 5:01-cr-00221-H-1 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 10, 2009). 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
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
