Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Haynes, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case from 2007. It affirms a district court's denial of Lino Haynes' Rule 35(a) motion, which allows a court to correct a sentence. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. It thus affirmed the denial for the reasons provided by the lower court. The appeals court also dispensed with oral arguments, as the case details were clear in the materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2008-07-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-7129

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case from 2007. It affirms a district court's denial of Lino Haynes' Rule 35(a) motion, which allows a court to correct a sentence. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. It thus affirmed the denial for the reasons provided by the lower court. The appeals court also dispensed with oral arguments, as the case details were clear in the materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    2 views2 pages

    United States v. Haynes, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case from 2007. It affirms a district court's denial of Lino Haynes' Rule 35(a) motion, which allows a court to correct a sentence. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. It thus affirmed the denial for the reasons provided by the lower court. The appeals court also dispensed with oral arguments, as the case details were clear in the materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 07-7129

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    LINO H. HAYNES,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (2:90-cr-00105-HCM)

    Submitted:

    June 30, 2008

    Decided:

    July 14, 2008

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

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Lino H. Haynes, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Philip Rosenberg, United


    States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Lino H. Haynes appeals the district courts order denying
    his Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a) motion and denying reconsideration of
    its May 11, 2004 order granting in part and denying in part his
    Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a) motion.
    find no reversible error.

    We have reviewed the record and

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons

    stated by the district court.

    See United States v. Haynes, No.

    2:90-cr-00105-HCM (E.D. Va. filed July 9, 2007; entered July 12,


    2007).

    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 -

    You might also like