Filed: Feb. 03, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7265 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SIKEO HARVELL BUTLER, a/k/a Keo, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:14-cr-00400-HMH-6) Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 3, 2017 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7265 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SIKEO HARVELL BUTLER, a/k/a Keo, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:14-cr-00400-HMH-6) Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 3, 2017 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion...
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7265 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SIKEO HARVELL BUTLER, a/k/a Keo, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:14-cr-00400-HMH-6) Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 3, 2017 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sikeo Harvell Butler, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Jean Howard, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Sikeo Harvell Butler appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for copies at government expense. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Butler, No. 6:14-cr-00400-HMH-6 (D.S.C. Aug. 30, 2016). 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
