Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Webb, 01-4257 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-4257 Visitors: 31
Filed: Oct. 10, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-4257 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM EUGENE WEBB, a/k/a James Thomas Webb, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR-99-373) Submitted: September 28, 2001 Decided: October 10, 2001 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-4257 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM EUGENE WEBB, a/k/a James Thomas Webb, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR-99-373) Submitted: September 28, 2001 Decided: October 10, 2001 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert L. McClellan, IVEY, MCCLELLAN, GATTON & TALCOTT, L.L.P., Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Benjamin H. White, Jr., United States Attorney, Michael F. Joseph, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: William Eugene Webb was convicted of possession of a firearm by a felon, possession of crack cocaine, and carrying a firearm during a drug trafficking offense. He challenges the district court’s denial of his pre-trial motion to suppress. We have carefully examined the transcript of the motion to suppress, and we find the court’s ruling to be without error. Thus, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. (J.A. at 99-102). 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
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer