United States v. Brian Joseph Pack

25 F.3d 1042, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20900, 1994 WL 258516
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJune 14, 1994
Docket93-6937
StatusPublished

This text of 25 F.3d 1042 (United States v. Brian Joseph Pack) 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. Brian Joseph Pack, 25 F.3d 1042, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20900, 1994 WL 258516 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

25 F.3d 1042
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff Appellee,
v.
Brian Joseph PACK, Defendant Appellant.

No. 93-6937.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 31, 1994.
Decided June 14, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Richard L. Voorhees, Chief District Judge. (CR-90-227-A, CA-93-39-1)

Brian Joseph Pack, appellant pro se.

Jerry Wayne Miller, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, NC, for appellee.

W.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before RUSSELL, PHILLIPS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order that construed his motion under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 as a 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 (1988) motion and denied it. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Pack, No. CR-90-227-A; CA-93-39-1 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 19, 1993).* 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

*

We deny Pack's motion for appointment of counsel. See Whisenant v. Yuam, 739 F.2d 160 (4th Cir.1984)

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

Related

Whisenant v. Yuam
739 F.2d 160 (Fourth Circuit, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 F.3d 1042, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20900, 1994 WL 258516, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-brian-joseph-pack-ca4-1994.