Filed: Apr. 26, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-4417 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WOODROW WILSON UNDERWOOD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:05-cr-00010-F-ALL) Submitted: March 12, 2007 Decided: April 26, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Geoffrey W.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-4417 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WOODROW WILSON UNDERWOOD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:05-cr-00010-F-ALL) Submitted: March 12, 2007 Decided: April 26, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Geoffrey W. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-4417 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WOODROW WILSON UNDERWOOD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:05-cr-00010-F-ALL) Submitted: March 12, 2007 Decided: April 26, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Geoffrey W. Hosford, HOSFORD & HOSFORD, P.L.L.C., Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellant. Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Jennifer May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Woodrow Wilson Underwood was convicted after a jury trial of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base, possession of marijuana, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. On appeal, he challenges the denial of his motion to suppress. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and joint appendix and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Underwood, No. 7:05-cr-00010-F-ALL (E.D.N.C. May 27, 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 -