Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Alan Barnett, 17-6781 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 17-6781 Visitors: 19
Filed: Aug. 29, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6781 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ALAN BOYD DONTA BARNETT, a/k/a Big Al, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:12-cr-00188-FDW-DSC-2) Submitted: August 24, 2017 Decided: August 29, 2017 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6781 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ALAN BOYD DONTA BARNETT, a/k/a Big Al, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (3:12-cr-00188-FDW-DSC-2) Submitted: August 24, 2017 Decided: August 29, 2017 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alan Boyd Donta Barnett, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Michael Kent, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina; Daniel Steven Ryan, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Alan Boyd Donta Barnett appeals the district court’s text order denying his motion to remand his closed criminal proceeding to state court. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Barnett, No. 3:12-cr-00188-FDW-DSC-2 (W.D.N.C. June 1, 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 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