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)
02-6023•United States of America v. Patricia Rae Fruetel
02-6023Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 20, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent - Appellee,
versus
PATRICIA RAE FRUETEL,
Petitioner - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District
Judge. (CR-91-70)
Submitted: April 29, 2002 Decided: May 20, 2002
Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Patricia Rae Fruetel, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Patricia Rae Fruetel appeals the district court’s order
denying her petition to modify the terms of her supervised release
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3583(e)(1) (West 2000). We have reviewed
the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. United States v. Fruetel, No. CR-91-70 (E.D. Va. Nov. 26,
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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.