Case ID: f-appx_88/html/0656-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Hilton THOMAS, a/k/a Dinkles, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 03-7349.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 30, 2004.
    Decided Feb. 27, 2004.
    Hilton Thomas, Appellant pro se. Jamie M. Bennett, Robert Reeves Harding, Assistant United States Attorneys, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Hilton Thomas appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 33 motion for a new trial. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Hilton, No. CR-97-355-WMN (D.Md. July 30, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED