Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Angelo Gilchrist Howard, A/K/A Bey Bey, 90-6063 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-6063 Visitors: 96
Filed: Jul. 09, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 907 F.2d 1140 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Angelo Gilchrist HOWARD, a/k/a Bey Bey, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-6063. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted June 4, 1990. Decided Ju
More

907 F.2d 1140
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Angelo Gilchrist HOWARD, a/k/a Bey Bey, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 90-6063.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 4, 1990.
Decided June 15, 1990.
Rehearing and Rehearing In Banc Denied July 9, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey, II, Chief District Judge. (CR No. 85-507-H)

Angelo Gilchrist Howard, appellant pro se.

Jefferson McClure Gray, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Md., for appellee.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and CHAPMAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Angelo Gilchrist Howard appeals from the district court's order which denied his Rule 35 motion to modify his sentence. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Howard, CR-85-507-H (D.Md. Apr. 4, 1990). 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.

2

AFFIRMED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer