United States v. McDaniel

Fourth Circuit

United States v. McDaniel

65 F. App'x 473

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. McDaniel. Read the opinion of the Court — 182 F. App'x 176 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 30, 2003·No. 03-6484·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Eugene McDaniel appeals from the district court’s order denying his “Motion for an Order to Compel/Specific Performance of a Plea Agreement.” 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. McDaniel, Nos. CR-9-111; CA-00-90-3 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 7, 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.

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

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Eugene McDaniel appeals from the district court’s order denying his “Motion for an Order to Compel/Specific Performance of a Plea Agreement.” 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. McDaniel, Nos. CR-9-111; CA-00-90-3 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 7, 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.

United States v. McDaniel, 65 F. App'x 473 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

65 F. App'x 473 (United States v. McDaniel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.