Filed: Aug. 27, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6776 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. NATHAN A. SILLA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:11-cr-00157-AW-1) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 27, 2013 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathan A. Silla, Appellant Pro Se. Chr
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6776 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. NATHAN A. SILLA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:11-cr-00157-AW-1) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 27, 2013 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathan A. Silla, Appellant Pro Se. Chri..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6776 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. NATHAN A. SILLA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:11-cr-00157-AW-1) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 27, 2013 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathan A. Silla, Appellant Pro Se. Christen Anne Sproule, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Nathan A. Silla appeals the district court’s order denying his post-judgment motion for the preparation of various transcripts at Government expense. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Silla’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Silla has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
