United States v. Bond

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Bond

561 F. App'x 279

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 25, 2014

DocketNo. 14-6017

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 561 F. App'x 279 (United States v. Bond) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Bond, 561 F. App'x 279 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William C. Bond appeals the district court’s orders denying his “Post Judgment Motion to Disqualify Government Attorneys and Request for Expedited Consideration,” “Motion to Unseal Grand Jury Records re: the Disqualified Attorneys,” and “Motion to Rule, Motion to Make Docket Live, and Motion to Put Letter of October 8, 2012, onto the Docket.” We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not err in denying Bond’s motions. Accordingly, we affirm. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny Bond’s motion to recuse and transfer, and deny his motion to expedite as moot. 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William C. Bond appeals the district court’s orders denying his “Post Judgment Motion to Disqualify Government Attorneys and Request for Expedited Consideration,” “Motion to Unseal Grand Jury Records re: the Disqualified Attorneys,” and “Motion to Rule, Motion to Make Docket Live, and Motion to Put Letter of October 8, 2012, onto the Docket.” We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not err in denying Bond’s motions. Accordingly, we affirm. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny Bond’s motion to recuse and transfer, and deny his motion to expedite as moot. 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

561 F. App'x 279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-bond-ca4-2014.