US v. Gonzales March
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to supplement [999610347-2] Originating case number: 3:08-cr-00590-CMC-6,3:12-cv-01977-CMC,3:10-cv-70294-CMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999658947]. Mailed to: Gonzales March. [15-6792]
Appeal: 15-6792
Doc: 10
Filed: 09/14/2015
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6792
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
GONZALES MARCH, a/k/a Gun, a/k/a Gon,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia.
Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior
District
Judge.
(3:08-cr-00590-CMC-6;
3:12-cv-01977-CMC;
3:10-cv-70924-CMC)
Submitted:
September 9, 2015
Decided:
September 14, 2015
Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gonzales March, Appellant Pro Se. Jimmie Ewing, Stanley D.
Ragsdale, Julius Ness Richardson, John David Rowell, Assistant
United States Attorneys, James Chris Leventis, Jr., OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-6792
Doc: 10
Filed: 09/14/2015
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Gonzales
March
appeals
the
district
court’s
order
dismissing his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion, after construing it
as an unauthorized successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.
We
have
reviewed
the
record
and
find
no
reversible
error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court.
United
States
v.
March,
Nos.
3:08-cr-00590-CMC-6;
3:12-cv-01977-CMC; 3:10-cv-70294-CMC (D.S.C. May 7, 2015).
We
deny March’s motion to supplement a request for a certificate of
appealability as moot.
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
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?