US v. Demorris Jame


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:05-cr-00161-JBF-JEB-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998458731] [10-6774]

Download PDF
US v. Demorris Jame Doc. 0 Case: 10-6774 Document: 5 Date Filed: 11/03/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6774 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. DEMORRIS ALEXANDER JAMES, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (2:05-cr-00161-JBF-JEB-1) Submitted: October 14, 2010 Decided: November 3, 2010 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Demorris Alexander James, Appellant Pro Se. Sherrie Scott Capotosto, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Case: 10-6774 Document: 5 Date Filed: 11/03/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Demorris Alexander James appeals the district court's order granting reducing his his 18 U.S.C. from 3582(c)(2) months' (2006) to motion and sentence 180 150 months' imprisonment based on a two-level reduction. the record and find no reversible error. We have reviewed Accordingly, we affirm United States v. for the reasons stated by the district court. James, No. 2:05-cr-00161-JBF-JEB-1 (E.D. Va. Jan. 6, 2010); see also Dillon v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 2683, 2693-94 (2010) (clarifying that 3582(c)(2) does not authorize a resentencing, but rather permits a sentence reduction within the narrow bounds established by the Commission, and concluding that United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), does not apply to 3582(c)(2) proceedings). 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?