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)
09-6300•United States of America v. Michael Dewayne Clark
09-6300Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 30, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-6300
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MICHAEL DEWAYNE CLARK,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Spartanburg. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (7:92-cr-00417-GRA-1)
Submitted: September 14, 2009 Decided: September 30, 2009
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Dewayne Clark, Appellant Pro Se. William Corley Lucius,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Michael Dewayne Clark appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion for a court order directing the federal
government to take custody of him or allow him to serve his
federal sentence concurrently with his state sentence. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United
States v. Clark, No. 7:92-cr-00417-GRA-1 (D.S.C. Jan. 30, 2009).
We deny the motion for appointment of counsel and 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.