Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Nance, 10-6357 (2010)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 10-6357 Visitors: 4
Filed: Dec. 06, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6357 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JAMES ROBERT NANCE, a/k/a Robert Nance, a/k/a Thomas James Alvin, a/k/a T.J. Alvin, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (4:06-cr-00027-RAJ-JEB-1) Submitted: November 30, 2010 Decided: December 6, 2010 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Jud
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6357 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JAMES ROBERT NANCE, a/k/a Robert Nance, a/k/a Thomas James Alvin, a/k/a T.J. Alvin, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (4:06-cr-00027-RAJ-JEB-1) Submitted: November 30, 2010 Decided: December 6, 2010 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Robert Nance, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Ronald Gill, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James Robert Nance appeals the district court’s order denying his petition for injunctive relief in which he seeks certain changes to his presentence report. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Nance, No. 4:06-cr-00027-RAJ-JEB-1 (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 5, 2010, and entered Feb. 8, 2010). We deny Nance’s motion for preparation of a transcript at government expense, and 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