From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Giles

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jun 17, 2016
652 F. App'x 210 (4th Cir. 2016)

Opinion

No. 16-6012

06-17-2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ERIC GILES, Defendant - Appellant.

Eric Giles, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.


UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:09-cr-00203-RJC-DCK-1) Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eric Giles, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Eric Giles appeals the district court's order denying his Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 motion for a new trial, which Giles filed pro se. We have reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion in either of the identified bases for the district court's ruling. See United States v. Robinson, 627 F.3d 941, 948 (4th Cir. 2010) (providing standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Giles, No. 3:09-cr-00203-RJC-DCK-1 (W.D.N.C. Sept. 15, 2015). 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


Summaries of

United States v. Giles

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jun 17, 2016
652 F. App'x 210 (4th Cir. 2016)
Case details for

United States v. Giles

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ERIC GILES, Defendant …

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jun 17, 2016

Citations

652 F. App'x 210 (4th Cir. 2016)

Citing Cases

Giles v. United States

The Fourth Circuit affirmed on June 17, 2016, because, after reviewing the record, it found no abuse of…