United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Higinio Jose Guzman, Defendant-appellant, 944 F.2d 902 (4th Cir. 1991)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. John A. MacKenzie, Senior District Judge. (CR-90-101-N)
Higinio Jose Guzman, appellant pro se.
Robert William Wiechering, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Va., for appellee.
E.D. Va.
AFFIRMED.
Before DONALD RUSSELL, PHILLIPS and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Higinio Jose Guzman appeals the district court's denial of his motion for correction or reduction of sentence under Fed. R. Crim. P. 35.* Guzman contends that the 36-month sentence imposed after his conviction for conspiracy to possess and distribute marijuana was based on inaccuracies in the presentence report.
Our review of the record illustrates that Guzman's contentions are without merit. The sentence imposed is well below the maximum term authorized by statute. 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846. Furthermore the alleged inaccuracies in the presentence report simply do not exist. We therefore affirm the district court's denial of Guzman's motion.
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.
Because the drug offense for which Guzman was sentenced occurred prior to November 1, 1987, this case is controlled by former Rule 35
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
