Filed: Dec. 31, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7463 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus VERNON JOHNSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CR-95- 260-L) Submitted: December 11, 1997 Decided: December 31, 1997 Before HALL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vernon Johnson
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7463 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus VERNON JOHNSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CR-95- 260-L) Submitted: December 11, 1997 Decided: December 31, 1997 Before HALL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vernon Johnson,..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7463 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus VERNON JOHNSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CR-95- 260-L) Submitted: December 11, 1997 Decided: December 31, 1997 Before HALL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vernon Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. John Alexander Gephart, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's orders denying his motions for a downward departure in sentence and requesting permis- sion to amend original pleading. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Johnson, No. CR-95-260-L (D. Md. Aug. 25 & Sept. 10, 1997). 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. AFFIRMED 2
