United States v. Rushie

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Rushie

92 F. App'x 52

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Rushie. Read the opinion of the Court — 45 F. App'x 313 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 8, 2004·No. 04-6222·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Robert Everton Rushie appeals a district court order denying his motion to unseal portions of the record in his criminal case. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Rushie, No. CR-00-396 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 13, 2004). * 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

*

To the extent Rushie seeks records that actually exist, his trial counsel would have copies.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Robert Everton Rushie appeals a district court order denying his motion to unseal portions of the record in his criminal case. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Rushie, No. CR-00-396 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 13, 2004). * 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

*

To the extent Rushie seeks records that actually exist, his trial counsel would have copies.

United States v. Rushie, 92 F. App'x 52 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

92 F. App'x 52 (United States v. Rushie) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.