Filed: Nov. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6973 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARSHA KING, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:14-cr-00065-RAJ-DEM-1) Submitted: November 15, 2018 Decided: November 20, 2018 Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ma
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6973 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARSHA KING, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:14-cr-00065-RAJ-DEM-1) Submitted: November 15, 2018 Decided: November 20, 2018 Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mar..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6973 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARSHA KING, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:14-cr-00065-RAJ-DEM-1) Submitted: November 15, 2018 Decided: November 20, 2018 Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marsha King, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Marsha King appeals the district court’s order denying her motions for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence and to admit documentary evidence, as well as the court’s subsequent order denying as moot several related motions. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. King, No. 2:14-cr-00065-RAJ-DEM-1 (E.D. Va. July 11, 2018 & July 12, 2018). 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
