Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Gregory Obey, 18-6546 (2018)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 18-6546 Visitors: 23
Filed: Sep. 18, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6546 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GREGORY DEVON OBEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:12-cr-00268-D-1) Submitted: September 13, 2018 Decided: September 18, 2018 Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per c
More
                                     UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                       No. 18-6546


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                     Plaintiff - Appellee,

              v.

GREGORY DEVON OBEY,

                     Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:12-cr-00268-D-1)


Submitted: September 13, 2018                               Decided: September 18, 2018


Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Gregory Devon Obey, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

       Gregory Devon Obey appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for

equitable tolling of the time to file a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. United States v. Obey, No. 5:12-cr-00268-D-1 (E.D.N.C. filed Apr. 15,

2018; entered Apr. 16, 2018). 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