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)
11-7531•United States of America v. Little Tom Childress
11-7531Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 22, 2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-7531
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
LITTLE TOM CHILDRESS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (7:94-cr-40106-JLK-6)
Submitted: February 16, 2012 Decided: February 22, 2012
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Little Tom Childress, Appellant Pro Se. Ronald Andrew Bassford,
Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Little Tom Childress appeals the district court’s
order dismissing without prejudice his petition for a writ of
error coram nobis. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. United States v. Childress, No.
7:94-cr-40106-JLK-6 (W.D. Va. Oct. 31, 2011). 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.