United States of America v. Craig O. Copley

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CRAIG O. COPLEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior
District Judge. (CA-90-47-HC)
Submitted: October 23, 2003 Decided: October 30, 2003
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Craig O. Copley, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant
United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Craig O. Copley appeals the district court’s orders denying
his pro se motions for discharge and reconsideration. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Copley’s motions
were filed within 180 days of the district court’s revocation of
his conditional release and were, thus, premature. See 18 U.S.C.
§ 4247(d) (2000). In addition, motions for discharge may not be
made pro se and, instead, must be filed by either counsel or a
legal guardian. Id. Therefore, we affirm. 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 --