Case ID: f-appx_80/html/0875-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Bernard GIBSON, Jr., Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 03-7063.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 10, 2003.
    Decided Nov. 17, 2003.
    Bernard Gibson, Jr., pro se.
    Stuart A. Berman, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
   PER CURIAM:

Bernard Gibson, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3582(c) (West 2000 & Supp.2003). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Gibson, No. CR-94-454-PJM (D. Md. filed July 1, 2003; entered July 4, 2003). We deny as unnecessary Gibson’s motion for general relief, in which he sought a certificate of appealability, because Gibson’s appeal is not from “the final order in a proceeding under [28 U.S.C.] section 2255.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2000). 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