Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adrian Maurice HUDGINS, a/k/a Dee, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-07-26
Citations: 191 F. App'x 227
Docket Number: No. 06-6298
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Adrian Maurice HUDGINS, a/k/a Dee, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 191
Pages: 227–228

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Adrian Maurice HUDGINS, a/k/a Dee, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 06-6298.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 20, 2006.
Decided: July 26, 2006.
Adrian Maurice Hudgins, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph William Hooge Mott, Thomas Jack Bondurant, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Adrian Maurice Hudgins appeals the district court's order denying his "motion to vacate and reimpose judgment," which the court construed as a motion to reopen the time for filing an appeal. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Hudgins, No. 7:94-cr-00133-sgw (W.D.Va. Jan. 19, 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.