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)
04-6012•United States of America v. Virgil W. Womack
04-6012Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 25, 2004
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
VIRGIL W. WOMACK,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (CR-00-27; CA-00-236)
Submitted: May 28, 2004 Decided: June 25, 2004
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Virgil W. Womack, Appellant Pro Se. Marvin Jennings Caughman,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, David
Calhoun Stephens, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville,
South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Virgil W. Womack appeals the district court’s order of
December 5, 2003, denying his “Motion to Vacate Restitution Order
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3664(k).” We have reviewed the record and
the court’s order and find no reversible error in the denial of
Womack’s motion. Accordingly, 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.