US v. Roderick Whitaker

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999730781-2]. Originating case number: 5:09-cr-00125-BR-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [999804189]. Mailed to: Roderick Arnez Whitaker. [15-7989]

Appeal: 15-7989

Doc: 9

Filed: 04/26/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7989

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RODERICK ARNEZ WHITAKER, a/k/a Snoop,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
W. Earl Britt, Senior
District Judge. (5:09-cr-00125-BR-1)

Submitted:

April 21, 2016

Decided:

April 26, 2016

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Roderick
Arnez
Whitaker,
Appellant
Pro
Se.
Banumathi
Rangarajan, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7989

Doc: 9

Filed: 04/26/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Roderick Arnez Whitaker appeals the district court’s order
granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for sentence
reduction based on Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines.
We

have

reviewed

Accordingly,

we

the
deny

record

and

Whitaker’s

find
motion

no

reversible

for

error.

appointment

of

counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
See United States v. Whitaker, No. 5:09-cr-00125-BR-1 (E.D.N.C.
Sept. 11, 2015).
facts

and

legal

We dispense with oral argument because the
contentions

are

adequately

presented

in

the

materials before this court and argument would not aid in the
decisional process.

AFFIRMED

2