US v. Hassan Hine
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:07-cr-00323-BO-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [1000044182]. Mailed to: Hassan Genell Hines. [17-6060]
Appeal: 17-6060
Doc: 7
Filed: 03/17/2017
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-6060
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
HASSAN GENELL HINES,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:07-cr-00323-BO-1)
Submitted:
March 14, 2017
Before FLOYD and
Circuit Judge.
HARRIS,
Decided:
Circuit
Judges,
and
March 17, 2017
DAVIS,
Senior
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Hassan Genell Hines, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Fesak, Thomas B.
Murphy, Stephen Aubrey West, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Michael Gordon James, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 17-6060
Doc: 7
Filed: 03/17/2017
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Hassan
several
Genell
drug
district
court
imprisonment.
judgment.
and
Hines
was
firearm
sentenced
On
convicted
charges
Hines
direct
to
and
a
appeal,
by
a
in
January
total
this
federal
of
court
480
jury
2009,
the
months
affirmed
of
of
the
United States v. Hines, 380 F. App’x 320 (4th Cir.
2010) (No. 09-4060).
In January 2017, Hines filed a second
notice of appeal of the criminal judgment.
However, because we
have previously affirmed this criminal judgment, we dismiss the
appeal
as
duplicative
and
untimely.
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 in the decisional process.
DISMISSED
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?