Filed: Oct. 18, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7022 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARQUIS ANTHONY NELSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00058-1; 1:15-cv-13059) Submitted: October 13, 2016 Decided: October 18, 2016 Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7022 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARQUIS ANTHONY NELSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00058-1; 1:15-cv-13059) Submitted: October 13, 2016 Decided: October 18, 2016 Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opin..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MARQUIS ANTHONY NELSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. Irene C. Berger, District
Judge. (1:08-cr-00058-1; 1:15-cv-13059)
Submitted: October 13, 2016 Decided: October 18, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marquis Anthony Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. John Lanier File,
Assistant United States Attorney, Beckley, West Virginia; Steven
Loew, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Marquis Anthony Nelson appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion for an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. However, we affirm as
modified to reflect that Nelson’s motion is dismissed without
prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. See United States v. Modanlo,
762 F.3d 403, 408 (4th Cir. 2014) (holding that “district court
does not regain jurisdiction until the issuance of the mandate by
the clerk of the court of appeals” (internal quotation marks
omitted)). 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 AS MODIFIED
2