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)
06-7000•United States of America v. Terence Jerome Richardson
06-7000Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 11, 2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7000
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
TERENCE JEROME RICHARDSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District
Judge. (3:00-cr-00383-REP-1)
Submitted: September 28, 2006 Decided: October 11, 2006
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Terence Jerome Richardson, Appellant Pro Se. David John Novak,
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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Terence Jerome Richardson appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion for a new trial. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. United States v.
Richardson, No. 3:00-cr-00383-REP-1 (E.D. Va. Mar. 22, 2006). 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.