United States v. Halley ( 2010 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6798
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
DERYCK LENNOX HALLEY,
Defendant – Appellant.
No. 08-6851
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
DERYCK LENNOX HALLEY,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior
District Judge. (7:89-cr-00115-jct-1)
Submitted: January 19, 2010 Decided: January 26, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Deryck Lennox Halley, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Ray Wolthuis,
Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
In Appeal No. 08-6798, Deryck Lennox Halley appeals
the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of
sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). In Appeal
No. 08-6851, Halley appeals the district court’s subsequently
filed amended judgment denying the same motion. The two appeals
have been consolidated. Because the district court’s amended
judgment supersedes the court’s previous order denying Halley’s
§ 3582(c)(2) motion, we dismiss Halley’s appeal of the previous
order as moot.
With respect to Halley’s appeal of the district
court’s amended judgment, we have reviewed the record and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. United States v. Halley, No.
7:89-cr-00115-jct-1 (W.D. Va. May 13, 2008). 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.
DISMISSED IN PART;
AFFIRMED IN PART
3