US v. Albert Charles Burge

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:09-cr-00017-GCM-DLH-1,1:12-cv-00375-GCM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999629147]. Mailed to: Burgess. [15-6585]

Appeal: 15-6585

Doc: 14

Filed: 07/28/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6585

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ALBERT CHARLES BURGESS,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior
District Judge. (1:09-cr-00017-GCM-DLH-1; 1:12-cv-00375-GCM)

Submitted:

July 23, 2015

Decided:

July 28, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Albert Charles Burgess, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Thomas Richard
Ascik, Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Asheville, North Carolina; Kimlani M. Ford, Cortney Randall,
Edward R. Ryan, Assistant United States Attorneys, Charlotte,
North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6585

Doc: 14

Filed: 07/28/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Albert Charles Burgess, Jr., appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion seeking an extension of time to file a
Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion.

On appeal, we confine our review to

the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief.

See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).

Because Burgess’ informal briefs do not challenge the basis for
the district court’s disposition, Burgess has forfeited appellate
review of the court’s order.

Accordingly, we affirm the district

court’s judgment. We 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

2