Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Michael Loiseau, 14-7155 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-7155 Visitors: 51
Filed: Dec. 23, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7155 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL ANGELO LOISEAU, a/k/a Malik, a/k/a Michael Wright, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:97-cr-00344-REP-1) Submitted: December 18, 2014 Decided: December 23, 2014 Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished pe
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7155 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL ANGELO LOISEAU, a/k/a Malik, a/k/a Michael Wright, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:97-cr-00344-REP-1) Submitted: December 18, 2014 Decided: December 23, 2014 Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Angelo Loiseau, Appellant Pro Se. Brian R. Hood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Michael Angelo Loiseau, a Virginia inmate, appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to remove or seal the federal detainer that was lodged against Loiseau after he pleaded guilty to violating the terms of his federal supervised release and was sentenced to forty-six months’ imprisonment, to be served consecutive to Loiseau’s Virginia sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See United States v. Loiseau, No. 3:97-cr-00344-REP-1 (E.D. Va. July 21, 2014). 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
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