Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
24-7092•United States of America v. Dyvae Davis
24-7092Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit20.06.2025
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-7092
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DYVAE DAVIS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Elizabeth City. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (2:22-cr-00010-M-RN-1)
Submitted: June 17, 2025 Decided: June 20, 2025
Before GREGORY, QUATTLEBAUM, and BERNER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dyvae Davis, Appellant Pro Se. David A. Bragdon, Assistant United States Attorney,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Dyvae Davis appeals the district court’s order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
motion for a sentence reduction. Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in
Davis’s informal brief, we have reviewed the record and discern no abuse of discretion.*
United States v. Spruhan, 989 F.3d 266, 269 (4th Cir. 2021) (stating standard of review);
see 4th Cir. R. 34(b); Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal
brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues
preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We
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
* To the extent Davis seeks to challenge the validity of his 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)
conviction, he did not properly preserve that challenge for this appeal.
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.