Filed: Dec. 28, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7312 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KEITHROY NOEL CLARKE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (2:97-cr-00166-RBS) Submitted: December 20, 2007 Decided: December 28, 2007 Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam op
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7312 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KEITHROY NOEL CLARKE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (2:97-cr-00166-RBS) Submitted: December 20, 2007 Decided: December 28, 2007 Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7312 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KEITHROY NOEL CLARKE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (2:97-cr-00166-RBS) Submitted: December 20, 2007 Decided: December 28, 2007 Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Keithroy Noel Clarke, Appellant Pro Se. Laura P. Tayman, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Keithroy Noel Clarke appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for “administrative habeas corpus and petition for immediate release.” We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. United States v. Clarke, No. 2:97-cr-00166-RBS (E.D. Va. July 27, 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 -
