Filed: Feb. 05, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7783 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM SHORTER, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CR-98-192-A) Submitted: January 30, 2003 Decided: February 5, 2003 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Shorte
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7783 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM SHORTER, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CR-98-192-A) Submitted: January 30, 2003 Decided: February 5, 2003 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Shorter..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7783 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM SHORTER, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CR-98-192-A) Submitted: January 30, 2003 Decided: February 5, 2003 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Shorter, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Morris Rudolph Parker, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: William Shorter, Jr., filed an appeal on July 17, 2002, in a district court case in which he challenges his sentence. The notice of appeal does not identify an order from which he appeals. We have examined the notice of appeal and the record in the district court action and find no underlying order to review. We therefore dismiss the appeal. We deny all Shorter’s pending motions. 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. DISMISSED 2
