The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
16-6083•United States of America v. Michael James Taylor
16-6083Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 1, 2016
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6083
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MICHAEL JAMES TAYLOR,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Bryson City. Martin K.
Reidinger, District Judge. (2:11-cr-00022-MR-DLH-10)
Submitted: July 28, 2016 Decided: August 1, 2016
Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam.
Michael James Taylor, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Richard Ascik,
Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorneys, Thomas
Michael Kent, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville,
North Carolina; Dana Owen Washington, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Michael James Taylor appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion for reduction of sentence, 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. United States v. Taylor, No. 2:11-cr-
00022-MR-DLH-10 (W.D.N.C. Jan. 19, 2016). We deny Taylor’s
motion to appoint counsel. 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.