Case ID: f-appx_446/html/0617-01.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. Craig A. MURPHY, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-6594.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 29, 2011.
    Decided: Sept. 13, 2011.
    
      Craig A. Murphy, Appellant Pro Se. David Novak, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appel-lee.
    Before MOTZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Craig A. Murphy appeals the district court’s order denying his motions to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) and pursuant to the All Writs Act. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Murphy, No. 3:96-cr-00066-REP-17 (E.D.Va. Apr. 7, 2011). We have reviewed Murphy’s challenge to his sentence under the All Writs Act and conclude that this extraordinary remedy is not available in this instance. See Carlisle v. United States, 517 U.S. 416, 429, 116 S.Ct. 1460, 134 L.Ed.2d 613 (1996); United States v. Torres, 282 F.3d 1241, 1245 (10th Cir.2002). Accordingly, the district court properly denied Murphy’s motion for that relief. Finally, 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.