United States v. Cofield

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Cofield

229 F. App'x 275

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 19, 2007

Docket06-7731

StatusUnpublished

This text of 229 F. App'x 275 (United States v. Cofield) 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. Cofield, 229 F. App'x 275 (4th Cir. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Keenan Kester Cofield appeals the district court’s marginal order denying his motion to reconsider, under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), the denial of his “motion to correct sentence.” We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Cofield’s motion to remand and affirm. 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.

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

PER CURIAM:

Keenan Kester Cofield appeals the district court’s marginal order denying his motion to reconsider, under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), the denial of his “motion to correct sentence.” We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Cofield’s motion to remand and affirm. 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

229 F. App'x 275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-cofield-ca4-2007.