United States v. Boardley

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7717
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
WARREN BOARDLEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CR-
88-386-JFM)
Submitted: April 17, 2003 Decided: May 5, 2003
Before LUTTIG and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Warren Boardley, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Warren Boardley appeals the district court’s order denying his
“motion to append presentence report.” Boardley sought the
correction of certain alleged inaccuracies in his 1989 presentence
report. Under former Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(c)(3)(D), motions to
correct errors in a presentence report must be made prior to the
imposition of sentence. United States v. Warner, 23 F.3d 287, 290
(10th Cir. 1994); United States v. Engs, 884 F.2d 894, 895-97 (5th
Cir. 1989). Boardley’s motion was filed more than twelve years
after imposition of sentence, and the district court was without
jurisdiction to consider the motion. We dismiss Boardley’s appeal.
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.
DISMISSED
2