Case ID: f-appx_202/html/0611-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      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. Terence Jerome RICHARDSON, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-7000.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 28, 2006.
    Decided: Oct. 11, 2006.
    Terence Jerome Richardson, Appellant Pro Se. David John Novak, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, 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    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Terence Jerome Richardson appeals the district court’s order denying his 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. United States v. Richardson, No. 3:00-cr-00383-REP-1 (E.D.Va. Mar. 22, 2006). 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.