Filed: Feb. 23, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2009 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CONNELL SPAIN, Defendant, and CONNELL SPAIN, SR., Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-82-60-N) Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 23, 1999 Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Co
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2009 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CONNELL SPAIN, Defendant, and CONNELL SPAIN, SR., Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-82-60-N) Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 23, 1999 Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Con..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2009 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CONNELL SPAIN, Defendant, and CONNELL SPAIN, SR., Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-82-60-N) Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 23, 1999 Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Connell Spain, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Connell Spain, Sr., appeals the district court’s denying his request for court records pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (1994). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. According- ly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Spain, No. CR-82-60-N (E.D. Va. June 19, 1998). We dis- pense 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
