Filed: Jan. 27, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-4320 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOHN WESLEY FAIRCLOTH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Malcolm J. Howard, Dis- trict Judge. (CR-95-72) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 27, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curia
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-4320 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOHN WESLEY FAIRCLOTH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Malcolm J. Howard, Dis- trict Judge. (CR-95-72) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 27, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-4320 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOHN WESLEY FAIRCLOTH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Malcolm J. Howard, Dis- trict Judge. (CR-95-72) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 27, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Wesley Faircloth, Appellant Pro Se. Christine Witcover Dean, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion to stay forfeiture proceedings. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Faircloth, No. CR-95-72 (E.D.N.C. Apr. 2, 1997). Additionally, we deny the Appellee's motions to dismiss the appeal and to stay the briefing schedule. 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 deci- sional process. AFFIRMED 2