Court Opinion

ID: 9368541
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-04 21:00:21.034604+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:09.063334
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6361      Doc: 10         Filed: 02/03/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-6361

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        DARRICK LAMORRIS MCKENZIE,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Wilmington. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (7:18-cr-00055-D-1)

        Submitted: January 19, 2023                                       Decided: February 3, 2023

        Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Darrick Lamorris McKenzie, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6361      Doc: 10          Filed: 02/03/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Darrick Lamorris McKenzie appeals the district court’s order dismissing his

        postjudgment motions. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the

        informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because McKenzie’s informal brief does not

        challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, he has forfeited appellate review of

        the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The

        informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited

        to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.

        We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

        presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

        process.

                                                                                         AFFIRMED

                                                      2