Filed: Jun. 25, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6421 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus PAUL NAGY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:98-hc-00951-BR) Submitted: June 15, 2007 Decided: June 25, 2007 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James B. Craven, III, Durham,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6421 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus PAUL NAGY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:98-hc-00951-BR) Submitted: June 15, 2007 Decided: June 25, 2007 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James B. Craven, III, Durham, N..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6421 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus PAUL NAGY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:98-hc-00951-BR) Submitted: June 15, 2007 Decided: June 25, 2007 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James B. Craven, III, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant. Michael David Bredenberg, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Paul Nagy appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for free transcripts. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Nagy, No. 5:98-hc-00951-BR (E.D.N.C. Jan. 29, 2007). 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 -
