Filed: Aug. 27, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6642 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. KENNETH JUNIOR SMITH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (7:98-cr-01169-HMH-1) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 27, 2013 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Junior Smit
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6642 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. KENNETH JUNIOR SMITH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (7:98-cr-01169-HMH-1) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 27, 2013 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Junior Smith..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6642 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. KENNETH JUNIOR SMITH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (7:98-cr-01169-HMH-1) Submitted: August 22, 2013 Decided: August 27, 2013 Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Junior Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Jean Howard, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kenneth Junior Smith appeals the district court’s denial of his Fed. R. Crim. P. 36 motion to clarify the oral pronouncement of his sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Smith’s motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
