United States v. McLean

Fourth Circuit

United States v. McLean

120 F. App'x 988

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 7, 2005

Docket04-7756

StatusUnpublished

This text of 120 F. App'x 988 (United States v. McLean) 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. McLean, 120 F. App'x 988 (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Thomas George McLean appeals the district court’s order denying as untimely his motion to dismiss indictment, Fed. R.Crim.P. (12)(b)(3). 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. McLean, No. CR-00-160 (E.D.Va. Sept. 1, 2004). We grant McLean’s motion to proceed in forma pauper-is and 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:

Thomas George McLean appeals the district court’s order denying as untimely his motion to dismiss indictment, Fed. R.Crim.P. (12)(b)(3). 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. McLean, No. CR-00-160 (E.D.Va. Sept. 1, 2004). We grant McLean’s motion to proceed in forma pauper-is and 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)

120 F. App'x 988, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mclean-ca4-2005.