United States v. Wynter
This text of United States v. Wynter (United States v. Wynter) 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
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-4578
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
KIMAUNIE DOLANEA WYNTER, a/k/a Kevin L. Moriah, a/k/a Mike, a/k/a Bill, a/k/a Jamaican Bill,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. James H. Michael, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-97-1)
Submitted: April 24, 2001 Decided: May 23, 2001
Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Margaret McLeod Cain, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellant. Robert P. Crouch, Jr., United States Attorney, Jean B. Hudson, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Kimaunie Dolanea Wynter appeals the district court’s order
denying his motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 36. We have reviewed the
record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible
error. “Rule 36 authorizes a court to correct only clerical errors
in the transcription of judgments.” United States v. Werber, 51
F.3d 342, 343 (2d Cir. 1995). Because the district court correctly
determined that there was no such clerical error in the tran-
scription of the judgment in this case, the court properly denied
Wynter’s motion. Finding no error, we affirm the ruling of the
district court. See id. at 347. 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.
We express no opinion as to whether or not the sentence
complained of might be corrected in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 or habeas
corpus proceeding.
AFFIRMED
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Wynter, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-wynter-ca4-2001.