Cases

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER KATHRYN H. VRATIL, United States District Judge On June 14, 2011, the Court sentenced defendant to 240 months in prison. On a Rule 35(b) motion, the Court later reduced defendant’s sentence to 170 months. Recently, Kirk Redmond, an Assistant Federal Public Defender, negotiated with government counsel on potential relief under Amendment 782 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines

PER CURIAM: Travis Le-Ron Carrington appeals the district court’s order denying a reduction in his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Carrington, No. 3:00-cr-00388-JRS-2 (E.D.Va. Jan. 24, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten

*867Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Denard Edward Carrington appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for declaratory judgment in his criminal case and a subsequent order denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find

PER CURIAM: Travis Le-Ron Carrington appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 706. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Carrington, No. 3:00-cr-00388-JRS-2 (E.D. Va. Jan 15, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions ar

PER CURIAM: Travis Le-Ron Carrington appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for sentence reduction pursuant to Amendment 706. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Carrington, No. 3:00-cr-00388-JRS-2 (E.D. Va. Jan 15, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions ar

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,  Plaintiff-Appellee, v.  No. 99-4537 JOHN CARRINGTON, Defendant-Appellant.  On Remand from the United States Supreme Court. (S. Ct. No. 99-10250) Argued: June 6, 2002

57 F.Supp.2d 345 (1999) UNITED STATES of America, v. John CARRINGTON, Defendant. No. CRIM. A. 98-0037-C. United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Charlottesville Division. July 8, 1999. *346 Krystyna Carmel Nelson, Charlottesville, for John Carrington, defendant. Ray B. Fitzgerald, Jr., Charlottesville, VA, for U.S.

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS No. 22-CM-0580 BRITTANY SHANTEL CARRINGTON, APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATE

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 24-1308 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Charles Matthew Carrington, also known as Charles Matthew Carrington, Jr.

124 F.3d 220 U.S.v.Carrington* NO. 95-8995 United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. Aug 18, 1997 Appeal From: M.D.Ga. ,No.92000825CRWDO 1 Affirmed.

USCA1 Opinion UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ____________________ No. 95-2211 UNITED STATES, Appellee, v.

TORRUELLA, Chief Judge. On March 28, 1995, Defendant Kerr Car-rington (“Carrington”) pleaded guilty to four counts of interstate transportation of property taken by fraud (Counts I through IV), see 18 U.S.C. § 2314, and two counts of wire fraud (counts V and VI), see 18 U.S.C. § 1343. On August 21,1995, Carrington was sentenced to a term o

_|jLUCIEN C. BERTRAND, Jr., Judge, Pro Tern. This appeal stems from a foreclosure proceeding instituted by the Farmers Home Administration of the United States Department of Agriculture (FmHA) against Charles and Linda Carrington. The dispute before us is between the FmHA and the Rapides Parish Sheriffs Office over the commission due the sheriff for services performed during the pendency of the foreclosure proceeding. After

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7138 Doc: 67 Filed: 01/23/2024 Pg: 1 of 29 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-7138 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. THEODORE MACON CARRINGTON, JR., De

892 F.2d 77 U.S.v.Carrington* NO. 89-2521 United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. DEC 13, 1989 1 Appeal From: E.D.Tex. 2

909 F.2d 1477 U.S.v.Carrington (Bernie) NO. 90-5086 United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. JUL 16, 1990 1 Appeal From: D.N.J. 2 AFFIRMED.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

OPINION BUSH, Judge. Before the court are the government’s motion to dismiss this suit and plaintiff Derrick Carrington’s motions to amend the complaint and to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.1 The court concludes that it lacks *131subject matter jurisdiction over th

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.

856 F.2d 185 U.S.v.Carrington (Alex W.) NO. 88-3036 United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. JUL 15, 1988 Appeal From: D.Del., Schwartz, J. 1 AFFIRMED.