Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Garnett Bryant Poole, 90-7374 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-7374 Visitors: 40
Filed: Mar. 25, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 929 F.2d 695 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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. Garnett Bryant POOLE, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-7374. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted March 4, 1991. Decided March 25, 1991. Appe
More

929 F.2d 695
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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

No. 90-7374.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 4, 1991.
Decided March 25, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. James H. Michael, Jr., District Judge. (CR-87-1)

Garnett Bryant Poole, appellant pro se.

Morgan Eugene Scott, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Va., for appellee.

W.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER and K.K. HALL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Garnett Bryant Poole appeals from the district court's order denying his request for a transcript. Our review of the record and the district court's order discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Poole, CR-87-1 (W.D.Va. Sept. 14, 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