Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Murray, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of Lenzie Lee Murray, Jr.'s motion to challenge his sentence based on Ring v. Arizona. The court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning for denying the motion. The court also stated that the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented so oral arguments were not necessary.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-12-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-7570

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of Lenzie Lee Murray, Jr.'s motion to challenge his sentence based on Ring v. Arizona. The court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning for denying the motion. The court also stated that the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented so oral arguments were not necessary.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Murray, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of Lenzie Lee Murray, Jr.'s motion to challenge his sentence based on Ring v. Arizona. The court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning for denying the motion. The court also stated that the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented so 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 02-7570

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    LENZIE LEE MURRAY, JR.,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
    District Judge. (CR-96-157)

    Submitted:

    December 16, 2002

    Decided:

    December 23, 2002

    Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Lenzie Lee Murray, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Lenzie Lee Murray, Jr., appeals the district courts order
    denying his Motion to Petition Unconstitutional Imposed Sentence
    Pursuant to Ring v. Arizona.

    We have reviewed the record and find

    no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning stated


    by the district court.

    See United States v. Murray, No. CR-96-157

    (E.D. Va. filed Sept. 26, 2002 & entered Sept. 27, 2002).

    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