Filed: May 01, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6256 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. REGINALD DEWAYNE JEFFRIES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, District Judge. (1:07-cr-00056-MR-1) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: May 1, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Reginald Dewayne Jeff
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6256 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. REGINALD DEWAYNE JEFFRIES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, District Judge. (1:07-cr-00056-MR-1) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: May 1, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Reginald Dewayne Jeffr..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6256 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. REGINALD DEWAYNE JEFFRIES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, District Judge. (1:07-cr-00056-MR-1) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: May 1, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Reginald Dewayne Jeffries, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Jill Westmoreland Rose, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Reginald Dewayne Jeffries appeals the district court’s order denying his “Motion for Public Access to CJA Itemization of Attorney Fees and Services w/Dates.” We have reviewed the record and found no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Jeffries, No. 1:07-cr-00056-MR-1 (W.D.N.C. Jan. 24, 2012). 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
