Filed: Nov. 15, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7347 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LAFAWN DEWAYNE BOBBITT, a/k/a Mandingo, a/k/a Dingo, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:97-cr-00169-JAG-1) Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 15, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7347 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LAFAWN DEWAYNE BOBBITT, a/k/a Mandingo, a/k/a Dingo, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:97-cr-00169-JAG-1) Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 15, 2012 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curia..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7347
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LAFAWN DEWAYNE BOBBITT, a/k/a Mandingo, a/k/a Dingo,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:97-cr-00169-JAG-1)
Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 15, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lafawn Dewayne Bobbitt, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Daniel Cooke,
Assistant United States Attorney, Brian R. Hood, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lafawn Dewayne Bobbitt appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion for appointment of counsel to
investigate new evidence in his criminal case. Bobbitt was
convicted in 1998; this court affirmed the conviction and later
denied Bobbitt relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.
2012). Because Bobbitt is not eligible for court-appointed
counsel at this juncture, we affirm the order of the district
court. 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