Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joseph Lewis PULLEN, Sr., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-02-23
Citations: 88 F. App'x 602
Docket Number: No. 03-7743, 03-7783, 03-7784
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Joseph Lewis PULLEN, Sr., Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 88
Pages: 602–603

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Joseph Lewis PULLEN, Sr., Defendant—Appellant.
No. 03-7743, 03-7783, 03-7784.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 12, 2004.
Decided Feb. 23, 2004.
Joseph Lewis Pullen, Sr., Appellant pro se. Gurney Wingate Grant, II, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated appeals, Joseph Lewis Pullen, Sr., appeals the district court's orders denying his motion for electronic monitoring/home incarceration, denying his motion for personal recognizance bond pending appeal, and denying his motion for reconsideration for electronic monitoring/home confinement. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Pullen, No. CR-01-133 (E.D. Va. Sept. 15, 2003; Sept. 26, 2003; Nov. 3, 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