United States v. Payne

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: April 25, 1997
• Docket: 96-4754
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-4754

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

CHARLES C. PAYNE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Parkersburg. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge; Joseph Robert Goodwin, District Judge. (CR-90-280)

Submitted: April 17, 1997 Decided: April 25, 1997

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Hunt L. Charach, Federal Public Defender, Brian J. Kornbrath, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Rebecca A. Betts, United States Attorney, Ray M. Shepard, Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Charles C. Payne appeals from the district court's order deny-

ing his motion to continue his hearing for revocation of supervised

release. We affirm.

We review a district court's denial of a motion for continu-

ance for an abuse of discretion. To warrant reversal of such a denial, an appellant must establish both that the district court

abused its discretion and that he or she was prejudiced thereby.

United States v. Bakker, 925 F.2d 728, 735 (4th Cir. 1991). Payne has established neither and accordingly we affirm the district

court's denial of his motion for continuance. 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