Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Jeffrey A. Martinovich, 17-6651 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 17-6651 Visitors: 9
Filed: Nov. 07, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6651 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JEFFREY A. MARTINOVICH, Defendant - Appellant. No. 17-6652 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JEFFREY A. MARTINOVICH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (4:12-cr-00101-AWA-RJK-1; 4:15-cr-00050-AWA-LRL-1) Submitted: October 30,
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6651 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JEFFREY A. MARTINOVICH, Defendant - Appellant. No. 17-6652 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JEFFREY A. MARTINOVICH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (4:12-cr-00101-AWA-RJK-1; 4:15-cr-00050-AWA-LRL-1) Submitted: October 30, 2017 Decided: November 7, 2017 Before DUNCAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeffrey A. Martinovich, Appellant Pro Se. V. Kathleen Dougherty, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia; Kevin Patrick Hudson, Brian James Samuels, Assistant United States Attorneys, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Jeffrey A. Martinovich appeals the district court’s orders correcting his restitution orders. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Martinovich, Nos. 4:12-cr-00101-AWA-RJK-1; 4:15-cr-00050-AWA-LRL-1 (E.D. Va. Feb. 14, 2017; Apr. 6, 2017). 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 3
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