United States v. Mendez

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Mendez. Read the opinion of the Court — 102 F. App'x 266
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided July 14, 2003·No. 02-7864·Unpublished

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UNPUBLISHED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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

United States v. Mendez, (4th Cir. 2003).

United States v. Mendez (United States v. Mendez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.