United States v. Nathaniel Watkins, A/K/A J.R., A/K/A Peanut, A/K/A Nut

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Nathaniel Watkins, A/K/A J.R., A/K/A Peanut, A/K/A Nut

21 F.3d 426, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 15785, 1994 WL 83773

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 14, 1994·No. 93-7348·Published

Opinion

21 F.3d 426
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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.
Nathaniel WATKINS, a/k/a J.R., a/k/a Peanut, a/k/a Nut,
Defendant-Appellant.

No. 93-7348.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Feb. 17, 1994.
Decided: March 14, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria, Claude M. Hilton, District Judge. (CR-90-260, CA-93-1035-AM).

Nathaniel Watkins, appellant pro se.

Michael R. Smythers, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for appellee.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before RUSSELL, MURNAGHAN, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 (1988) motion. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Watkins, No. CR-90-260, CA-93-1035-AM (E.D. Va. Nov. 24, 1993). 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

21 F.3d 426
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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.
Nathaniel WATKINS, a/k/a J.R., a/k/a Peanut, a/k/a Nut,
Defendant-Appellant.

No. 93-7348.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Feb. 17, 1994.
Decided: March 14, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria, Claude M. Hilton, District Judge. (CR-90-260, CA-93-1035-AM).

Nathaniel Watkins, appellant pro se.

Michael R. Smythers, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for appellee.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before RUSSELL, MURNAGHAN, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 (1988) motion. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Watkins, No. CR-90-260, CA-93-1035-AM (E.D. Va. Nov. 24, 1993). 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. Nathaniel Watkins, A/K/A J.R., A/K/A Peanut, A/K/A Nut, 21 F.3d 426, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 15785, 1994 WL 83773 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

21 F.3d 426 (United States v. Nathaniel Watkins, A/K/A J.R., A/K/A Peanut, A/K/A Nut) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.