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)
03-7099•United States of America v. Joseph Lewis Pullen, Sr
03-7099Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 17, 2004
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7099
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JOSEPH LEWIS PULLEN, SR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CR-01-133)
Submitted: November 19, 2003 Decided: February 17, 2004
Before NIEMEYER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joseph Lewis Pullen, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Gurney Wingate Grant,
II, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Joseph Lewis Pullen, Sr., appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion to correct sentence and his request for
appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. See United States v. Pullen, No. CR-01-133
(E.D. Va. July 1, 2003). We deny Pullen’s motion for appointment
of counsel. 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.