Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Sanders, 01-8092 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-8092 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jun. 18, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-8092 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JERRY SANDERS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CR-93-34-MU) Submitted: June 13, 2002 Decided: June 18, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jerry Sanders, Appellant P
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-8092 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JERRY SANDERS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CR-93-34-MU) Submitted: June 13, 2002 Decided: June 18, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jerry Sanders, Appellant Pro Se. Kenneth Davis Bell, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Jerry Sanders appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion seeking to challenge his conviction and sentence pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4) and denying as moot his motion for ruling on his Rule 60(b) motion. 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. Sanders, No. CR-93-34-MU (W.D.N.C. May 4, 2001; Nov. 26, 2001). 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