United States v. Grandison

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: May 5, 2003
• Docket: 03-6365
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6365

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

VARDEN M. GRANDISON, a/k/a Verden M. Grandison,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CR-01-126)

Submitted: April 24, 2003 Decided: May 5, 2003

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Varden M. Grandison, Appellant Pro Se. Eric J. McDonald, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Varden M. Grandison appeals the district court’s order denying

his February 2003 motion for reconsideration of a sentence imposed

in March 2002.* We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. See United States v. Grandison, No. CR-01-126

(E.D. Va. Feb. 18, 2003). 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

* To the extent Grandison’s informal brief raises additional claims not directly related to the denial of his motion for reconsideration, this court is without jurisdiction to consider them. See Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr., 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (holding that period for filing notice of appal is “mandatory and jurisdictional”).