Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Surratt, 05-7051 (2006)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-7051 Visitors: 15
Filed: Mar. 28, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7051 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JERRY HOWARD SURRATT, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CR-03-108) Submitted: March 23, 2006 Decided: March 28, 2006 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jerry Howard Surrat
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7051 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JERRY HOWARD SURRATT, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CR-03-108) Submitted: March 23, 2006 Decided: March 28, 2006 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jerry Howard Surratt, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Steve R. Matheny, Felice McConnell Corpening, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Jerry Howard Surratt, Jr. appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider the court’s prior order denying Surratt’s application for a writ of corum nobis pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). 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. See Surratt v. United States, 5:03-CR-108-1-BO (E.D.N.C. May 18, 2005). 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