US v. Emmanuel Ereme

Filing 920100528

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7575 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. EMMANUEL THAD EREME, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. (8:02-cr-00478-PJM-2; 8:08-cv-00671-PJM) Submitted: April 22, 2010 Decided: May 28, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary E. Bair, Erica J. Sutter, BENNETT & BAIR, LLC, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Adam K. Ake, Deborah Johnston, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Emmanuel Thad Ereme was sentenced to 144 months in prison after a jury convicted him of conspiracy to dispense, distribute and possess with intent to distribute Schedule II controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846 (2006), and several counts of unlawfully dispensing various Schedule II controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) (2006). After the district court denied his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion, the district court granted Ereme's motion for a certificate of appealability. We have reviewed the record and the district court's order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order. See United States v. Ereme, Nos. 8:02-cr-00478-PJM-2; 8:08-cv-00671PJM (D. Md. filed July 22, 2009; entered July 23, 2009). dispense with oral argument because the facts and We legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?