The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
01-4266•United States of America v. Robert Earl Cole
01-4266Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 11, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-4266
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ROBERT EARL COLE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (CR-00-274)
Submitted: August 28, 2001 Decided: September 11, 2001
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas N. Cochran, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro,
North Carolina, for Appellant. Benjamin H. White, Jr., United
States Attorney, Steven H. Levin, Assistant United States Attorney,
Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Robert Earl Cole pled guilty to possession with intent to
distribute cocaine and carrying a firearm during a drug trafficking
crime. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
On appeal, Cole alleges that the government breached an oral
agreement. We do not find that the district court’s factual
finding that the government did not breach the oral plea agreement
was clearly erroneous. United States v. Conner, 930 F.2d 1073,
1076-77 (4th Cir. 1991). Thus, this claim fails. Although we
grant Cole’s motion to file a pro se supplemental brief, we find no
merit to any of the claims raised therein.
Accordingly, we affirm Cole’s conviction and sentence. 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.