Filed: Dec. 05, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6920 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FRANKLYN EARL BANNERMAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:90-cr-00105-HCM) Submitted: November 19, 2007 Decided: December 5, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frankly
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6920 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FRANKLYN EARL BANNERMAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:90-cr-00105-HCM) Submitted: November 19, 2007 Decided: December 5, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Franklyn..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6920 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FRANKLYN EARL BANNERMAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (2:90-cr-00105-HCM) Submitted: November 19, 2007 Decided: December 5, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Franklyn Earl Bannerman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Franklyn Earl Bannerman appeals the district court’s order denying his motion filed pursuant to former Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Bannerman, No. 2:90-cr-00105-HCM (E.D. Va. May 17, 2007). 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 -
