Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-10-06051/USCOURTS-ca4-10-06051-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Monty Marshall
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6051

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MONTY MARSHALL, a/k/a Mustafa,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior

District Judge. (4:02-cr-00002-RGD-TEM-1)

Submitted: July 30, 2010 Decided: August 17, 2010

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Monty Marshall, Appellant Pro Se. Timothy Richard Murphy, 

Special Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, 

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-6051 Doc: 11 Filed: 08/17/2010 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Monty Marshall appeals the district court’s orders

granting in part the Government’s Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b) motion

and denying Marshall’s motion for reconsideration. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United 

States v. Marshall, No. 4:02-cr-00002-RGD-TEM-1 (E.D. Va. 

Nov. 19 & Dec. 8, 2009). In addition, we find most of 

Marshall’s claims waived due to his failure to timely raise them 

in district court. See Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 

(4th Cir. 1993); Holland v. Big River Minerals Corp., 181 F.3d 

597, 605 (4th Cir. 1999). We grant Marshall’s motions to seal 

his informal brief and supplemental informal brief. 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

Appeal: 10-6051 Doc: 11 Filed: 08/17/2010 Pg: 2 of 2