Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William HASKINS, a/k/a Julio, a/k/a K.C., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-06-26
Citations: 474 F. App'x 287
Docket Number: No. 12-6551
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William HASKINS, a/k/a Julio, a/k/a K.C., Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 474
Pages: 287–287

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William HASKINS, a/k/a Julio, a/k/a K.C., Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-6551.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 21, 2012.
Decided: June 26, 2012.
William Haskins, Appellant Pro Se. Gary L. Call, John Lanier File, Steven Loew, Charles T. Miller, John J. Frail, Assistant United States Attorneys, Charleston, West Virginia; John Castle Parr, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia; Miller A. Bush-ong, III, Office of the United States Attorney, Beckley, West Virginia; Michael Lee Keller, Thomas Charles Ryan, Michael Harvard Spencer, Office of the United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
William Haskins pled guilty to three counts of distributing crack and one count of aiding and abetting the distribution of crack and was sentenced to 420 months of imprisonment. His sentence was affirmed on appeal. United States v. Haskins, No. 96-4154, 1998 WL 393990 (4th Cir.1998). Haskins recently filed a second notice of appeal from his criminal judgment, which was entered in 1996. To the extent that Haskins seeks to appeal this judgment a second time, we dismiss the appeal as du-plicative and untimely. To the extent that Haskins seeks to appeal the district court's expected ruling on his recent letter to the court, construed by the court as a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006), we dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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.
DISMISSED.