Filed: Jun. 25, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6300 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. EDUARD BANGIYEV, a/k/a Eddie, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:14-cr-00206-LO-6) Submitted: June 20, 2019 Decided: June 25, 2019 Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eduard Bangiyev, Appel
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6300 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. EDUARD BANGIYEV, a/k/a Eddie, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:14-cr-00206-LO-6) Submitted: June 20, 2019 Decided: June 25, 2019 Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eduard Bangiyev, Appell..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6300 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. EDUARD BANGIYEV, a/k/a Eddie, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:14-cr-00206-LO-6) Submitted: June 20, 2019 Decided: June 25, 2019 Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eduard Bangiyev, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Eduard Bangiyev appeals the district court’s order dismissing his petition for writ of error coram nobis or audita querela. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Bangiyev, No. 1:14-cr-00206-LO-6 (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 14, 2019; entered Feb 15, 2019). 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
