United States v. King
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-6034
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ANDRE CARDELL KING, a/k/a Bo King,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CR-94-30)
Submitted: May 19, 1998 Decided: February 10, 1999
Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Andre Cardell King, Appellant Pro Se. Robert James Conrad, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Andre Cardell King appeals the district court’s order denying
his motion for a new trial. We have reviewed the record and the
district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. According-
ly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United
States v. King, No. CR-94-30 (W.D.N.C. Dec. 18, 1997). 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
United States v. King (United States v. King) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.