# United States v. Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · January 24, 1996

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/988276

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** January 24, 1996
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished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/988276

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7560

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

versus

JOSEPH NATHANIEL BROWN, JR., a/k/a Joe Jr.,

Defendant - Appellant,

versus

CHARLES DAVID WHALEY,

Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge.
(CR-93-151)

Submitted: January 11, 1996 Decided: January 24, 1996

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Nathaniel Brown, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Charles David
Whaley, MORCHOWER, LUXTON & WHALEY, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
2
PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his

request for monetary sanctions from his attorney if his attorney

failed to comply with a court order by a certain date. We have

reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. United States v. Brown, No. CR-93-151 (E.D. Va.
Aug. 29, 1995). 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

3

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/988276. Public record. Not legal advice.