# United States v. Lawrence Edward Brown, Jr.

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · June 18, 1990 · 907 F.2d 1140

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/544464

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** June 18, 1990
- **Citations:** 907 F.2d 1140; 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 9796; 1990 WL 86408
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/544464

## Opinion text

907 F.2d 1140
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Lawrence Edward BROWN, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
No. 90-6755.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted June 4, 1990.
Decided June 18, 1990.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR Nos. 87-112-G, 87-113, 87-114, 87-111; C/A No. 89-520-G)
Lawrence Edward Brown, Jr., appellant pro se.
Paul Alexander Weinman, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, N.C., for appellee.
M.D.N.C.
AFFIRMED.
Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and CHAPMAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
1
Lawrence Edward Brown, Jr. appeals from the district court's order refusing relief under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 . Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Brown, CR Nos. 87-112-G, 87-113-G, 87-114-G, 87-111-G; C/A No. 89-520-G (M.D.N.C. Dec. 8, 1989). 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.
2
AFFIRMED.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/544464. Public record. Not legal advice.