US v. Cleveland McLean, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to supplement [998466579-2] Originating case number: 2:90-cr-00105-HCM-TEM-5,2:08-cv-00588-RGD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998577826]. Mailed to: Cleveland McLean. [10-7372]

Appeal: 10-7372

Document: 14

Date Filed: 04/28/2011

Page: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7372

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
CLEVELAND MCLEAN, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:90-cr-00105-HCM-TEM-5; 2:08-cv-00588-RGD)

Submitted:

April 14, 2011

Decided:

April 28, 2011

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cleveland McLean, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Neil H. MacBride,
United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-7372

Document: 14

Date Filed: 04/28/2011

Page: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Cleveland

McLean,

Jr.,

appeals

the

district

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

court’s

We previously

remanded the case for further consideration of McLean’s motion.
The district court reconsidered the motion and again denied it.
We

have

reviewed

the

record

and

find

no

reversible

error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court.

United States v. McLean, Nos. 2:90-cr-00105-HCM-TEM-5;

2:08-cv-00588-RGD (E.D. Va. filed Sept. 13 and entered Sept. 14,
2010).

We

brief.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal
before

grant

contentions
the

court

McLean’s

motion

are

adequately

and

argument

to

supplement

presented

would

not

in
aid

his

the
the

informal

materials
decisional

process.
AFFIRMED

2