United States v. Limbourgh Alphonso Watson, A/K/A Junior Watson

842 F.2d 1293, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3260, 1988 WL 24285
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 16, 1988
Docket87-5593
StatusUnpublished

This text of 842 F.2d 1293 (United States v. Limbourgh Alphonso Watson, A/K/A Junior Watson) 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. Limbourgh Alphonso Watson, A/K/A Junior Watson, 842 F.2d 1293, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3260, 1988 WL 24285 (4th Cir. 1988).

Opinion

842 F.2d 1293
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Limbourgh Alphonso WATSON, a/k/a Junior Watson, Defendant-Appellant.

87-5593.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

March 16, 1988.

Jeffrey C. Hines on brief for appellant.

Breckinridge L. Willcox, United States Attorney, Katharine J. Armentrout, Assistant United States Attorney on brief for appellee.

Before K.K. HALL, MURNAGHAN, and SPROUSE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Limbourgh Alfonso Watson appeals his conviction, following a bench trial, of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, along with aiding and abetting, in violation of 21 U.S.C. Secs. 846, 841(b) and 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2. On appeal, Watson contends that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence seized after a search of his apartment, pursuant to a duly authorized search and seizure warrant.

Upon review of the record and the district court's order, we find this appeal to be without merit. Because the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively, we dispense with oral argument and affirm the judgment below on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Carl Barry Francis, et al., Crim. No. JFM-86-0572 (D.Md. Mar. 16, 1986).

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

United States v. Nardone (William)
842 F.2d 1293 (Fourth Circuit, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
842 F.2d 1293, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3260, 1988 WL 24285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-limbourgh-alphonso-watson-aka-junior-watson-ca4-1988.