Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Gonzalez-Delgado, 08-7636 (2008)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 08-7636 Visitors: 58
Filed: Dec. 24, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7636 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARCOS GONZALEZ-DELGADO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:04-cr-00084-LHT-DLH-1) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 24, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marcos
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7636 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARCOS GONZALEZ-DELGADO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:04-cr-00084-LHT-DLH-1) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 24, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marcos Gonzalez-Delgado, Appellant Pro Se. Jill Westmoreland Rose, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Marcos Gonzalez-Delgado appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to dismiss his indictment, filed pursuant to 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. Gonzalez-Delgado, No. 1:04-cr-00084-LHT-DLH-1 (W.D.N.C. July 18, 2008). 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 * As the district court noted, Gonzalez-Delgado likely intended to bring this motion under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3)(B). However, as relief is unavailable to him under either subsection of Rule 12, we find this to be of no consequence. 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