Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06970/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06970-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Brenda Kay Ware
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6970

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

BRENDA KAY WARE,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, 

Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:97-cr-00047-FPS-2)

Argued: December 8, 2015 Decided: January 5, 2016

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, SHEDD, Circuit Judge, and Elizabeth 

K. DILLON, United States District Judge for the Western District 

of Virginia, sitting by designation.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ARGUED: Jason Paul Steed, BELL NUNNALLY & MARTIN LLP, Dallas, 

Texas, for Appellant. Donald M. Kersey, III, WEST VIRGINIA 

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW, Morgantown, West Virginia, for 

Appellee. ON BRIEF: William J. Ihlenfeld, II, United States 

Attorney, Tara N. Tighe, Assistant United States Attorney, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6970 Doc: 33 Filed: 01/05/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

In 1997, a federal jury convicted Brenda Kay Ware of 

conspiracy to defraud the United States, in violation of 18 

U.S.C. § 371; two counts of fraud by wire, radio, or television, 

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343; and one count of making a 

false or fictitious statement, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001. 

The district court sentenced her to ten months of imprisonment 

and a three-year term of supervised release. In February 2015, 

Ware wrote a letter to the district judge who imposed the 

sentence, asking that the court seal the record of her criminal 

conviction. The court construed the letter as either a motion to 

seal or a motion to expunge, and it denied relief.

Having reviewed the record, and having had the benefit of 

oral argument, we find no error. Accordingly, we affirm the 

district court’s denial of relief.

AFFIRMED

Appeal: 15-6970 Doc: 33 Filed: 01/05/2016 Pg: 2 of 2