Case ID: f-appx_616/html/0057-02.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. Kelly George STANBACK, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-6969.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 9, 2015.
    Decided: Sept. 14, 2015.
    
      Kelly George Stanback, Appellant Pro Se. Grayson A. Hoffman, Jeb Thomas Ter-rien, Assistant United States Attorneys, Elizabeth G. Wright, Office of the United States Attorney, Harrisonburg, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Kelly George Stanback appeals the district court’s order granting his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Stanback, No. 5:02-cr-30020-SGW-1 (W.D.Va. filed June 8 and entered June 9, 2015). 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. 
      
       Although the district court granted Stanbaclc’s § 3582 motion, the reduction granted by the court did not reduce Stanback’s sentence to the full extent he requested.