Filed: Jul. 20, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-4002 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TERRELL DEVON BROOKS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CR-99-189) Submitted: June 30, 2000 Decided: July 20, 2000 Before MURNAGHAN, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. J. Kelly Haley, III,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-4002 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TERRELL DEVON BROOKS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CR-99-189) Submitted: June 30, 2000 Decided: July 20, 2000 Before MURNAGHAN, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. J. Kelly Haley, III, R..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-4002
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
TERRELL DEVON BROOKS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis-
trict Judge. (CR-99-189)
Submitted: June 30, 2000 Decided: July 20, 2000
Before MURNAGHAN, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
J. Kelly Haley, III, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Helen F.
Fahey, United States Attorney, Laura A. Colombell, Assistant United
States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Terrell Devon Brooks appeals his convictions for possession of
a firearm by an unlawful user of a controlled substance and pos-
session of ammunition by an unlawful user of a controlled sub-
stance. On appeal, Brooks alleges there was insufficient evidence
presented at trial to support these convictions. We have reviewed
the record and find that the evidence was sufficient. See Glasser
v. United States,
315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942). Accordingly, we affirm.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-
tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court
and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2