History
  • No items yet
midpage
United States v. Daniel Watlington
16-7347
4th Cir.
Feb 3, 2017
Check Treatment
Docket

*1 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Daniel Watlington, Appellant Pro Se. S. Katherine Burnette, Joshua Bryan Royster, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. *2 PER CURIAM:

Daniel Watlington appeals the district court’s order denying his “Request for Nunc Pro Tunc Amendment for Addendum Presentence Report.” We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Watlington, No. 5:05- cr-00004-F-1 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 15, 2016). 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

Case Details

Case Name: United States v. Daniel Watlington
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date Published: Feb 3, 2017
Docket Number: 16-7347
Court Abbreviation: 4th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.