Filed: Jan. 25, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7321 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RANDY L. TORANZO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:02-cr-00075-F) Submitted: November 22, 2006 Decided: January 25, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Randy L. Toranzo, Ap
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7321 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RANDY L. TORANZO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:02-cr-00075-F) Submitted: November 22, 2006 Decided: January 25, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Randy L. Toranzo, App..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7321 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RANDY L. TORANZO, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (7:02-cr-00075-F) Submitted: November 22, 2006 Decided: January 25, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Randy L. Toranzo, Appellant Pro Se. Frank DeArmon Whitney, United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Randy L. Toranzo appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to correct alleged clerical errors in his final judgment order pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 36. We have reviewed the district court’s order and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Toranzo, No. 7:02-cr-00075-F (E.D.N.C. May 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 -
