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)
03-7292•United States of America v. Craig Dehaven Gaskins, a/k/a “C”
03-7292Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitDec 22, 2003
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7292
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CRAIG DEHAVEN GASKINS, a/k/a “C”,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith,
District Judge. (CR-00-14)
Submitted: December 11, 2003 Decided: December 22, 2003
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Craig Dehaven Gaskins, Appellant Pro Se. William David Muhr, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Craig Dehaven Gaskins appeals the district court’s order
denying his “Motion to Correct Sentence.” 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. Gaskins,
No. CR-00-14 (E.D. Va. Aug. 12, 2003). 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.