Filed: Apr. 26, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6200 KEITH RUSSELL JUDD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus USA, United States of America, et al, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (3:00-cv-00034-WCB) Submitted: April 20, 2006 Decided: April 26, 2006 Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Keith
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6200 KEITH RUSSELL JUDD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus USA, United States of America, et al, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (3:00-cv-00034-WCB) Submitted: April 20, 2006 Decided: April 26, 2006 Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Keith R..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6200 KEITH RUSSELL JUDD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus USA, United States of America, et al, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (3:00-cv-00034-WCB) Submitted: April 20, 2006 Decided: April 26, 2006 Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Keith Russell Judd, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Oliver Mucklow, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Keith Russell Judd appeals the district court’s order denying his motions for relief from judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Judd v. United States, No. 3:00-cv-00034-WCB (N.D.W. Va. Jan. 4, 2006). 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 -
