Filed: Apr. 23, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6235 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KENNETH LOUIS DAVIS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:02-cr-00552-LMB-1) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 23, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Louis Davis, Ap
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6235 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KENNETH LOUIS DAVIS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:02-cr-00552-LMB-1) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 23, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Louis Davis, App..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6235 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KENNETH LOUIS DAVIS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:02-cr-00552-LMB-1) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 23, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Louis Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Patrick Friel Stokes, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kenneth Louis Davis appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to correct a clerical error under Fed. R. Crim. P. 36. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Davis, No. 1:02-cr-00552-LMB-1 (E.D. Va. Feb. 6, 2013). 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
