Willis Smith v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Willis Smith v. United States

466 F.2d 509, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 7706

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Willis Smith v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 449 F.2d 176 →

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided August 30, 1972·No. 72-1885·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant having failed to file a brief, this appeal is referred to us under the provisions of Local Rule 9(c) (2). 1 *The record reveals that the appeal is entirely lacking merit and we therefore dismiss. 2

1

. It is appropriate to dispose of this pro se case summarily, pursuant to this Court’s local Rule 9(c) (2), appellant having failed to file a brief within the time fixed by Rule 31, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Kimbrough v. Beto, Director, 5th Cir. 1969, 412 F.2d 981.

2

. See Local Rule 20; Eisenhardt v. United States, 5th Cir. 1972, 461 F.2d 1267.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant having failed to file a brief, this appeal is referred to us under the provisions of Local Rule 9(c) (2). 1 *The record reveals that the appeal is entirely lacking merit and we therefore dismiss. 2

1

. It is appropriate to dispose of this pro se case summarily, pursuant to this Court’s local Rule 9(c) (2), appellant having failed to file a brief within the time fixed by Rule 31, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Kimbrough v. Beto, Director, 5th Cir. 1969, 412 F.2d 981.

2

. See Local Rule 20; Eisenhardt v. United States, 5th Cir. 1972, 461 F.2d 1267.

Willis Smith v. United States, 466 F.2d 509, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 7706 (5th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

466 F.2d 509 (Willis Smith v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related