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)
16-6758•United States of America v. Matthew James Dury
16-6758Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 4, 2016
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6758
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
MATTHEW JAMES DURY,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 16-6841
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
MATTHEW JAMES DURY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger,
District Judge. (1:08-cr-00016-MR-1)
Submitted: October 20, 2016 Decided: November 4, 2016
Before SHEDD and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Matthew James Dury, Appellant Pro Se. Donald David Gast,
Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
Matthew James Dury appeals the district court’s orders
denying relief on his post-judgment motions to dismiss
indictment, for a new trial and for recusal. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v.
Dury, No. 1:08-cr-00016-MR-1 (W.D.N.C. May 13, 2016; June 7,
2016). We deny Dury’s motion for default judgment and dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 3 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.