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UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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. [1000166475]. Mailed to: Hassan Genell Hines. [17-6968]

Appeal: 17-6968

Doc: 5

Filed: 10/03/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6968

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: September 28, 2017

Decided: October 3, 2017

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Hassan Genell Hines, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Fesak, Stephen Aubry 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 17-6968

Doc: 5

Filed: 10/03/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Hassan Genell Hines appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion as moot. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues
raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Hines’s informal brief
does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Hines has forfeited
appellate review of the court’s order. See Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430
n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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.

AFFIRMED

2