US v. James Webb


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion for rehearing [999731312-2] Originating case number: 5:12-cr-00301-D-1. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999738654]. Mailed to: James Webb. [15-7240]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-7240 Doc: 14 Filed: 01/20/2016 Pg: 1 of 2 ON REHEARING UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7240 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JAMES THOMAS WEBB, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:12-cr-00301-D-1) Submitted: January 8, 2016 Before SHEDD and Circuit Judge. THACKER, Decided: Circuit Judges, January 20, 2016 and DAVIS, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Thomas Webb, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Kristine L. Fritz, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-7240 Doc: 14 Filed: 01/20/2016 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: James Thomas Webb appeals the district denying his motion for release pending appeal. dismissed the appeal as moot. panel rehearing. rehearing. court’s order We previously Webb has now filed a petition for Upon review of the petition, we grant panel On rehearing, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Webb, No. 5:12-cr-00301-D-1 (E.D.N.C. filed July 30, 2015; entered July 31, 2015). legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials 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?