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)
09-7610•United States of America v. Curtis Burston, Jr.
09-7610Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitDec 4, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7610
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CURTIS BURSTON, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:04-cr-00371-F-2; 5:08-cv-00087-F)
Submitted: November 19, 2009 Decided: December 4, 2009
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Curtis Burston, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Steve R. Matheny,
Assistant United States Attorney, Kimberly Ann Moore, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Curtis Burston, Jr., appeals from a district court
order denying his motion to reconsider the denial of his motion
for a writ of audita querela. We have reviewed the district
court’s order and the record and affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. See United States v. Burston, No. 5:04-cr-
00371-F-2 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 5, 2009). 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.