US v. Darryl Stuckey
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:12-cr-00042-RWT-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Darryl Stuckey. [17-6620]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
DARRYL A. STUCKEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge. (8:12-cr-00042-RWT-1)
Submitted: September 27, 2017
Decided: September 29, 2017
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Darryl A. Stuckey, Appellant Pro Se. Jeffrey Brian Bender, Gregory Victor Davis,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Kelly O. Hayes,
Joseph McFarlane, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt,
Maryland; Sean B. O’Connell, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland,
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Darryl A. Stuckey appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for early
termination of supervised release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1) (2012). We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. United States v. Stuckey, No. 8:12-cr-00042-RWT-1 (D. Md.
filed May 2, 2017, & entered May 3, 2017). * 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.
To the extent Stuckey seeks vacatur of the restitution order entered at his original
sentencing, his failure to raise any challenge to the order below precludes our review of
his claim on appeal. See Pronomo v. United States, 814 F.3d 681, 686 (4th Cir. 2016)
(explaining that, absent exceptional circumstances, this court generally declines to
consider issues raised for first time on appeal).
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?