Filed: Apr. 04, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7863 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus NNAMDI AZUBIKE EMODI, a/k/a Tony, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-91-36-D) Submitted: March 26, 1996 Decided: April 4, 1996 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nnam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7863 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus NNAMDI AZUBIKE EMODI, a/k/a Tony, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-91-36-D) Submitted: March 26, 1996 Decided: April 4, 1996 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nnamd..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7863 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus NNAMDI AZUBIKE EMODI, a/k/a Tony, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-91-36-D) Submitted: March 26, 1996 Decided: April 4, 1996 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nnamdi Azubike Emodi, Appellant Pro Se. David Bernard Smith, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his "Motion for Modification of an Imposed Term of Imprisonment." 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. United States v. Emodi, No. CR-91- 36-D (M.D.N.C. Oct. 25, 1995). We dispense with oral argument be- cause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
