Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Easterling, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    Roderick Easterling appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate or correct his sentence. The district court found Easterling's notice of appeal was untimely. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no errors in the lower court's decision. The appellate court determined the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the case materials and oral arguments were not necessary.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-03-25 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-7612

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Roderick Easterling appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate or correct his sentence. The district court found Easterling's notice of appeal was untimely. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no errors in the lower court's decision. The appellate court determined the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the case materials and oral arguments were not necessary.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Easterling, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Roderick Easterling appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate or correct his sentence. The district court found Easterling's notice of appeal was untimely. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no errors in the lower court's decision. The appellate court determined the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the case materials and oral arguments were not necessary.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 96-7612

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    RODERICK F. EASTERLING,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (CR-93-171-A)
    Submitted:

    February 11, 1997

    Decided:

    March 25, 1997

    Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Roderick F. Easterling, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas More Hollenhorst,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order finding his
    notice of appeal untimely and denying his "Motion to Vacate, Set
    Aside or Correct Sentence pursuant to Rule 35(a)." We have reviewed
    the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible
    error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
    court. United States v. Easterling, No. CR-93-171-A (E.D. Va. Sept.
    3, 1996). 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

    You might also like