United States v. Pullen

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Pullen

86 F. App'x 678

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 17, 2004·No. No. 03-7099·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Joseph Lewis Pullen, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to correct sentence and his request for appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United, States v. Pullen, No. CR-01-133 (E.D.Va. July 1, 2003). We deny Pullen’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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.

Joseph Lewis Pullen, Sr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to correct sentence and his request for appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United, States v. Pullen, No. CR-01-133 (E.D.Va. July 1, 2003). We deny Pullen’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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. Pullen, 86 F. App'x 678 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

86 F. App'x 678 (United States v. Pullen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.