United States v. Clark

332 F. App'x 903
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 30, 2009·No. No. 09-6300·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Michael Dewayne Clark appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a court order directing the federal government to take custody of him or allow him to serve his federal sentence concurrently with his state sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Clark, No. 7:92-cr-00417-GRA-1 (D.S.C. Jan. 30, 2009). We deny the motion for appointment of counsel and 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.

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

United States v. Clark, 332 F. App'x 903 (4th Cir. 2009).

332 F. App'x 903 (United States v. Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.