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)
02-6465•United States of America v. Stuart C. Cole
02-6465Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 3, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6465
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
STUART C. COLE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (CA-99-424-3-V, CR-97-87)
Submitted: April 17, 2002 Decided: June 3, 2002
Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stuart C. Cole, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Lane Whisler, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Stuart C. Cole appeals the district court’s order denying his
motion for bond pending a decision on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West
Supp. 2001) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district
court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Cole,
Nos. CR-97-87; CA-99-424-3-V (W.D.N.C. Mar. 1, 2002). 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.