US v. Richard Bernard


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to extend filing time as moot [1000049865-2]. Originating case number: 3:03-cr-00420-JRS-3. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000122723]. Mailed to: Richard Dwight Bernard. [17-6225]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-6225 Doc: 7 Filed: 07/21/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6225 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RICHARD DWIGHT BERNARD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Senior District Judge. (3:03-cr-00420-JRS-3) Submitted: July 18, 2017 Decided: July 21, 2017 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard Dwight Bernard, Appellant Pro Se. Olivia L. Norman, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-6225 Doc: 7 Filed: 07/21/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Richard Dwight Bernard appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Bernard, No. 3:03-cr-00420-JRS-3 (E.D. Va. Jan. 30, 2017). We deny Bernard’s motion for an enlargement of time to appeal as moot and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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?