Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Nathan Silla, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of Nathan Silla's post-judgment motion for preparation of transcripts at government expense. Silla appealed pro se but his informal brief did not challenge the basis for the district court's ruling, forfeiting appellate review. The appellate panel confined its review to issues raised in Silla's brief and affirmed the district court's judgment without oral argument because the relevant facts and legal contentions were adequately presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2013-08-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 13-6776

    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    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of Nathan Silla's post-judgment motion for preparation of transcripts at government expense. Silla appealed pro se but his informal brief did not challenge the basis for the district court's ruling, forfeiting appellate review. The appellate panel confined its review to issues raised in Silla's brief and affirmed the district court's judgment without oral argument because the relevant facts and legal contentions were adequately presented.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Nathan Silla, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of Nathan Silla's post-judgment motion for preparation of transcripts at government expense. Silla appealed pro se but his informal brief did not challenge the basis for the district court's ruling, forfeiting appellate review. The appellate panel confined its review to issues raised in Silla's brief and affirmed the district court's judgment without oral argument because the relevant facts and legal contentions were adequately presented.

    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. 13-6776

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    NATHAN A. SILLA,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt.
    Alexander Williams, Jr., District
    Judge. (8:11-cr-00157-AW-1)

    Submitted:

    August 22, 2013

    Decided:

    August 27, 2013

    Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Nathan A. Silla,
    Assistant United
    Appellee.

    Appellant Pro Se.


    Christen Anne Sproule,
    States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Nathan

    A.

    Silla

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    denying his post-judgment motion for the preparation of various


    transcripts at Government expense.

    On appeal, we confine our

    review to the issues raised in the Appellants brief.


    Cir.

    R.

    34(b).

    Because

    Sillas

    informal

    brief

    See 4th
    does

    not

    challenge the basis for the district courts disposition, Silla


    has

    forfeited

    Accordingly,
    dispense

    we

    with

    contentions

    are

    appellate
    affirm
    oral

    review

    the

    district

    argument

    adequately

    of

    the
    courts

    because

    presented

    courts

    in

    the
    the

    order.

    judgment.

    facts

    We

    and

    legal

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like