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)
05-7269•United States of America v. Michael J. Sindram
05-7269Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 14, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7269
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL J. SINDRAM,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 05-7336
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL J. SINDRAM,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 05-7478
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
-- 1 of 3 --
- 2 -
MICHAEL J. SINDRAM,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CR-
96-111)
Submitted: November 21, 2005 Decided: February 14, 2006
Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael J. Sindram, Appellant Pro Se. Tamera Lynn Fine, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland; Hollis Raphael
Weisman, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 2 of 3 --
- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
In these consolidated appeals, Michael J. Sindram appeals
district court orders denying his motions for modification and
clarification, reconsideration and for appropriate relief. We have
reviewed the record and the district court orders and affirm on the
reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Sindram, No.
CR-96-111 (D. Md. Aug. 1, 2005; filed Aug. 12, 2005, entered Aug.
15, 2005; filed Sept. 6, 2005, entered Sept. 7, 2005). 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
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.