US v. Roger Arthur, Jr.


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:11-cr-00055-BO-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000127834]. Mailed to: Roger Arthur, Jr. [17-6241]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-6241 Doc: 11 Filed: 07/31/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6241 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROGER JUNIOR ARTHUR, JR., a/k/a Roger Arthur, Jr., a/k/a Busy, a/k/a Biz, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (7:11-cr-00055-BO-1) Submitted: July 27, 2017 Decided: July 31, 2017 Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roger Junior Arthur, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Timothy Severo, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-6241 Doc: 11 Filed: 07/31/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Roger Arthur, Jr., pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute a quantity of heroin and possession with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2012), and was sentenced to 41 months’ imprisonment. On direct appeal, this court affirmed the judgment. United States v. Arthur, 540 F. App’x 192 (4th Cir. 2013) (No. 12-4435). Arthur filed a second notice of appeal of the criminal judgment. 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 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?