United States v. Mendez
This text of United States v. Mendez (United States v. Mendez) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7864
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RAPHAEL MENDEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-91-350-5-HC)
Submitted: June 25, 2003 Decided: July 14, 2003
Before NIEMEYER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, G. Alan DuBois, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Jane E. Pearce, Research and Writing Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Michelle T. Fuseyamore, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Raphael Mendez appeals the district court order denying his
motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and revoking his
conditional release and remanding him to the custody of the
Attorney General. We have reviewed the record and find no error.
Accordingly, we affirm. We also deny the motion for an appeal bond
and a change of venue. 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Mendez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mendez-ca4-2003.