Court Opinion

ID: 1007375
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 19:24:40.356238+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:14:05.516452
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
 

  George Bennett appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a reduction of sentence for substantial assistance under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(b).
  
   *
  
  We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.
  
   See United States v. Bennett,
  
  No. CR-94-189 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 24, 2002). 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.
  

   *
  

   Bennett styled the motion for relief as "specific performance.”