United States v. Cabiness

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Cabiness

283 F. App'x 110

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided July 3, 2008·No. 07-7595·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Kirkwood Cabiness appeals the district court’s order denying his motions to compel and for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Cabiness, No. 4:02-cr-70031-NKM (W.D.Va. Oct. 16, 2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in *111 the materials before the 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

PER CURIAM:

Kirkwood Cabiness appeals the district court’s order denying his motions to compel and for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Cabiness, No. 4:02-cr-70031-NKM (W.D.Va. Oct. 16, 2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in *111 the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

United States v. Cabiness, 283 F. App'x 110 (4th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

283 F. App'x 110 (United States v. Cabiness) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.