United States v. Saunders ( 2003 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7769
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
EDWARD HAROLD SAUNDERS, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 03-6813
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
EDWARD HAROLD SAUNDERS, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief
District Judge. (CR-94-17)
Submitted: July 24, 2003 Decided: July 29, 2003
Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edward Harold Saunders, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer Marie
Hoefling, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
2
PER CURIAM:
Edward Harold Saunders, Jr., appeals the district court’s
orders denying his motion to supplement a 1994 motion and denying
his motions for reconsideration.* We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. See United States v. Saunders, No.
CR-94-17 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 26, 2002; May 1, 2003; May 30, 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
*
Although Saunders did not file a notice of appeal from the
district court’s order denying his second motion for
reconsideration, we have jurisdiction to review the order because
his timely filed informal brief is the functional equivalent of a
notice of appeal. Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 245 (1992).
3