Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Charles Murphy Gillis, 90-6113 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-6113 Visitors: 4
Filed: Nov. 28, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 917 F.2d 23 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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. Charles Murphy GILLIS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-6113. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 1, 1990. Decided Oct. 30, 1990. As Ame
More

917 F.2d 23
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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.
Charles Murphy GILLIS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 90-6113.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 1, 1990.
Decided Oct. 30, 1990.
As Amended Nov. 6, 1990.
Rehearing Denied Nov. 28, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Franklin T. Dupree, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-76-20-5)

Charles Murphy Gillis, appellant pro se.

Christine Witcover Dean, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, N.C., for appellee.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before DONALD RUSSELL and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Charles Murphy Gillis appeals from the district court's order which denied his motion for a new trial. 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. Gillis v. United States, CR-76-20-5 (E.D.N.C. July 25, 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