Filed: Nov. 22, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _ No. 09-4592 _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GREGORY WOODS, Appellant _ On Appeal from the United States District Court For the Middle District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Criminal Action No. 3-06-cr-00063-001) District Judge: Honorable A. Richard Caputo _ Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) November 17, 2010 _ Before: AMBRO, FISHER, and GREENBERG, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: November 22, 2010) _ OPINION _ AMBRO, Circuit Jud
Summary: NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _ No. 09-4592 _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GREGORY WOODS, Appellant _ On Appeal from the United States District Court For the Middle District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Criminal Action No. 3-06-cr-00063-001) District Judge: Honorable A. Richard Caputo _ Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) November 17, 2010 _ Before: AMBRO, FISHER, and GREENBERG, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: November 22, 2010) _ OPINION _ AMBRO, Circuit Judg..
More
NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _______________ No. 09-4592 _______________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GREGORY WOODS, Appellant _______________ On Appeal from the United States District Court For the Middle District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Criminal Action No. 3-06-cr-00063-001) District Judge: Honorable A. Richard Caputo _______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) November 17, 2010 _______________ Before: AMBRO, FISHER, and GREENBERG, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: November 22, 2010) _______________ OPINION _______________ AMBRO, Circuit Judge Gregory Woods, who pled guilty to one count of a multi-count drug-related indictment pursuant to a plea agreement, now seeks to withdraw that plea. He claims the drugs involved belonged to another, and produced an affidavit of his alleged co- conspirator to support that claim. The District Court, per Judge Caputo, dealt thoroughly with Woods’ claims, so much so that we have nothing to add to the Court’s analysis, and thus affirm. 2
