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)
99-4805•United States of America v. Jeane Sandrine Fokou, a/k/a Sandrine Fokou, a/k/a Jeane Sandrine Simo
99-4805Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 8, 2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-4805
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JEANE SANDRINE FOKOU, a/k/a Sandrine Fokou,
a/k/a Jeane Sandrine Simo,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, District Judge.
(CR-99-234)
Submitted: June 30, 2000 Decided: September 8, 2000
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dale Warren Dover, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Helen F.
Fahey, United States Attorney, Orin Kerr, Special Assistant United
States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Jean Sandrine Fokou appeals from her criminal conviction for
violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1543 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000), for pos-
session of a fraudulent Belgian passport. On appeal, she contends
that the district court erred in: (1) denying her motion to dis-
miss the criminal indictment on the ground that § 1543 does not
apply to the possession of foreign passports; and (2) granting the
Government’s motion in limine to bar presentation of her duress
defense. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s
opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on
the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Simo, 68
F. Supp. 2d 706 (E.D. Va. 1999). 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.