Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06714/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06714-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Eric Martin Van Buren
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6714

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ERIC MARTIN VAN BUREN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon,

Senior District Judge. (3:00-cr-00066-NKM-1)

Submitted: September 29, 2016 Decided: October 4, 2016

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eric Martin Van Buren, Appellant Pro Se. Jean Barrett Hudson, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6714 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/04/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Eric Martin Van Buren appeals the district court’s order 

denying relief on his “motion to have heard new substantive rule 

per the court’s discretion,” and his motion to correct his 

presentence report pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 36. Van Buren 

also appeals the district court’s subsequent order denying 

reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. United States v. Van Buren, No. 3:00-cr00066-NKM-1 (W.D. Va. Mar. 31, 2016; May 20, 2016). 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

Appeal: 16-6714 Doc: 10 Filed: 10/04/2016 Pg: 2 of 2