United States v. Fokou

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 8, 2000
Docket99-4805
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Fokou (United States v. Fokou) 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. Fokou, (4th Cir. 2000).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-4805

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JEANE SANDRINE FOKOU, a/k/a Sandrine Fokou, a/k/a Jeane Sandrine Simo,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CR-99-234)

Submitted: June 30, 2000 Decided: September 8, 2000

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dale Warren Dover, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Helen F. Fahey, United States Attorney, Orin Kerr, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Jean Sandrine Fokou appeals from her criminal conviction for

violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1543 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000), for pos-

session of a fraudulent Belgian passport. On appeal, she contends

that the district court erred in: (1) denying her motion to dis-

miss the criminal indictment on the ground that § 1543 does not

apply to the possession of foreign passports; and (2) granting the

Government’s motion in limine to bar presentation of her duress

defense. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Simo, 68

F. Supp. 2d 706 (E.D. Va. 1999). 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

Related

United States v. Simo
68 F. Supp. 2d 706 (E.D. Virginia, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Fokou, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-fokou-ca4-2000.