United States v. Woodfolk
This text of 19 F. App'x 149 (United States v. Woodfolk) 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.
Opinion
Corey Lorenzo Woodfolk appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion to vacate judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4) and denying his petition for writ of mandamus. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Woodfolk, No. CR-93-419-JFM (D.Md. Mar. 22, 2001); Woodfolk v. United States, No. CA-01-727-JFM (D.Md. Apr. 2, 2001). 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
19 F. App'x 149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-woodfolk-ca4-2001.