Filed: Jun. 06, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6545 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LEWIS DEAN GIBSON, a/k/a Sld Dft 3, a/k/a Dean Forney, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CR-97-310) Submitted: May 29, 2003 Decided: June 6, 2003 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam op
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6545 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LEWIS DEAN GIBSON, a/k/a Sld Dft 3, a/k/a Dean Forney, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CR-97-310) Submitted: May 29, 2003 Decided: June 6, 2003 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6545 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LEWIS DEAN GIBSON, a/k/a Sld Dft 3, a/k/a Dean Forney, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CR-97-310) Submitted: May 29, 2003 Decided: June 6, 2003 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lewis Dean Gibson, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Richard Ascik, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Lewis Dean Gibson appeals the district court’s order denying his post-trial motion to dismiss the indictment under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(2). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Gibson, No. CR-97-310 (W.D.N.C. filed Mar. 6, 2003 & entered Mar. 25, 2003). 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
