Filed: Aug. 23, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6795 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DENARD EDWARD CARRINGTON, a/k/a Bird, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:09-cr-00160-JRS-1) Submitted: August 18, 2011 Decided: August 23, 2011 Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Den
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6795 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DENARD EDWARD CARRINGTON, a/k/a Bird, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:09-cr-00160-JRS-1) Submitted: August 18, 2011 Decided: August 23, 2011 Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dena..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6795 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DENARD EDWARD CARRINGTON, a/k/a Bird, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:09-cr-00160-JRS-1) Submitted: August 18, 2011 Decided: August 23, 2011 Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Denard Edward Carrington, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Mastandrea- Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Denard Edward Carrington appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for declaratory judgment in his criminal case and a subsequent order denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Carrington, No. 3:09-cr-00160-JRS-1 (E.D. Va. May 23, 2011; June 21, 2011). 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. AFFIRMED 2
