Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ste

PER CURIAM:

Steven Gregory Richardson appeals the district court's order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. The Government has moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that Richardson's notice of appeal was untimely filed. Although the document Richardson captioned as a "motion of Appeal" was untimely, he earlier filed a "request for certificate of appealability" within the ten-day appeal period. Because we construe Richardson's "request" to be a timely notice of appeal, see Fed.R.App.P. 3, we deny the Government's motion to dismiss. Nevertheless, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Richardson, No. 5:05-cr-00298-F-1 (E.D.N.C. Jan. 26, 2009). 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.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

U.S. v. RICHARDSON
(Oct 1, 2009)