Narrative Opinion Summary
Jamal Timothy Hawkins appeals the district court's denial of his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision for the reasons stated in its order. The case citation is United States v. Hawkins, No. 1:05-cr-00497-LMB-1 (E.D.Va. Oct. 7, 2008), and it references United States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d 247 (4th Cir. 2009). The court determined that oral argument was unnecessary as the facts and legal issues were sufficiently presented in the submitted materials. The decision is affirmed.
Legal Issues Addressed
Necessity of Oral Argument in Appellate Reviewsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court determined that oral argument was unnecessary because the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented in the written submissions.
Reasoning: The court determined that oral argument was unnecessary as the facts and legal issues were sufficiently presented in the submitted materials.
Sentence Reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant sought a reduction in his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), but the district court's denial of this motion was upheld by the appellate court.
Reasoning: Jamal Timothy Hawkins appeals the district court's denial of his motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).
Standard of Review for Sentence Reduction Appealssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court conducted a review of the record and concluded there was no reversible error, thus affirming the district court's decision.
Reasoning: The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision for the reasons stated in its order.