U.S. v. WILLIAMS, 10-7198. (2011)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20110104089
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jan. 04, 2011
Latest Update: Jan. 04, 2011
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Namond Earl Williams appeals the district court's orders denying his motion for transcripts and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Williams , No. 1:90-cr-00135-JFM-4 (D. Md. July 26 & Aug. 12, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Namond Earl Williams appeals the district court's orders denying his motion for transcripts and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Williams , No. 1:90-cr-00135-JFM-4 (D. Md. July 26 & Aug. 12, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately p..
More
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Namond Earl Williams appeals the district court's orders denying his motion for transcripts and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Williams, No. 1:90-cr-00135-JFM-4 (D. Md. July 26 & Aug. 12, 2010). 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.
Source: Leagle
