United States v. Propst

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Propst

66 F. App'x 521

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 18, 2003

Docket03-6517

StatusUnpublished

This text of 66 F. App'x 521 (United States v. Propst) 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. Propst, 66 F. App'x 521 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Ortez Antoinne Propst seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his petition for writ of error coram nobis. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Propst, Nos. CR-91-119; CA-01-60-3-2 MU (W.D.N.C. Mar. 18, 2003). 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

PER CURIAM.

Ortez Antoinne Propst seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his petition for writ of error coram nobis. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Propst, Nos. CR-91-119; CA-01-60-3-2 MU (W.D.N.C. Mar. 18, 2003). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 F. App'x 521, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-propst-ca4-2003.