Filed: Apr. 30, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-7604 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL SCOTT MCRAE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:97-cr-00094-H-6) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Scott McRae, A
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-7604 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL SCOTT MCRAE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:97-cr-00094-H-6) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Scott McRae, Ap..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-7604 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MICHAEL SCOTT MCRAE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:97-cr-00094-H-6) Submitted: April 26, 2012 Decided: April 30, 2012 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Scott McRae, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Michael Scott McRae appeals the district court’s order denying various motions challenging his criminal conviction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant McRae’s motion to file an addendum and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. McRae, No. 5:97-cr-00094-H-6 (E.D.N.C. Nov. 9, 2011). 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
