Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Terrence CROSS, a/k/a Red, Defendant-Appellant; United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Terrence Cross, a/k/a Red, Defendant-Appellant; United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Terrence Cross, a/k/a Red, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-11-17
Citations: 453 F. App'x 388
Docket Number: Nos. 11-6692, 11-7307, 11-7308
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Terrence CROSS, a/k/a Red, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Terrence Cross, a/k/a Red, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Terrence Cross, a/k/a Red, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 453
Pages: 388–388

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Terrence CROSS, a/k/a Red, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Terrence Cross, a/k/a Red, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William Terrence Cross, a/k/a Red, Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 11-6692, 11-7307, 11-7308.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 15, 2011.
Decided: Nov. 17, 2011.
William Terrence Cross, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Pellatiro Tayman, Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
William Terrence Cross appeals the district court's orders denying his motions for relief under Fed.R.Crim.P. 36, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006), and Fed. R.App. P. 10(e). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's orders. United States v. Cross, No. 2:03-cr-00010-RBS-1 (E.D. Va. filed May 10 & entered May 11, 2011; filed Aug. 26 & entered Aug. 29, 2011; & Sept. 2, 2011). 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.