Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Nwaebo, 01-8037 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-8037 Visitors: 186
Filed: May 02, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-8037 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FELIX NWAEBO, Defendant - Appellant. No. 02-6293 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FELIX NWAEBO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CR- 91-217-CCB) Submitted: April 25, 2002 Decided: May 2, 2002 Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit J
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-8037 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FELIX NWAEBO, Defendant - Appellant. No. 02-6293 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FELIX NWAEBO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CR- 91-217-CCB) Submitted: April 25, 2002 Decided: May 2, 2002 Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Felix Nwaebo, Appellant Pro Se. Philip S. Jackson, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Felix Nwaebo appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion for reduction of sentence and his motion for credit for time served. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Nwaebo, No. CR-91-217- CCB (D. Md. filed Nov. 21, 2001, entered Nov. 26, 2001; Jan 23, 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 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer