US v. Jay Briley
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [1000118426-2] Originating case number: 1:12-cr-00482-LO-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Jay Briley. [17-6684]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
JAY BONANZA BRILEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:12-cr-00482-LO-1)
Submitted: September 28, 2017
Decided: October 3, 2017
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jay Bonanza Briley, Appellant Pro Se. Kellen Sean Dwyer, Rosanne Cannon Haney,
David Sang Hak Lee, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Jay Bonanza Briley appeals the district court’s order denying his motions for a
reduction in sentence, for summary judgment, and for production of sealed records for use
in his civil case, and granting the Government’s motion to seal an exhibit Briley filed. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Briley, No. 1:12-cr-00482-LO-1 (E.D.
Va. filed May 16, 2017; entered May 17, 2017). We deny Briley’s motion for appointment
of counsel and 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
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?