United States v. Gardner

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Gardner

218 F. App'x 235

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 21, 2007

Docket06-6763

StatusUnpublished

This text of 218 F. App'x 235 (United States v. Gardner) 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. Gardner, 218 F. App'x 235 (4th Cir. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Emmanuel J. Gardner appeals the district court’s amended judgment entered pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 36. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Gardner, No. 4:03-cr-00014-H (E.D.N.C. Mar. 23, 2006). We further deny Gardner’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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:

Emmanuel J. Gardner appeals the district court’s amended judgment entered pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 36. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Gardner, No. 4:03-cr-00014-H (E.D.N.C. Mar. 23, 2006). We further deny Gardner’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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)

218 F. App'x 235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-gardner-ca4-2007.