Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Jorge Ortega-Benitez, A/K/A Jorge Ortega, 952 F.2d 1396, 4th Cir. (1992)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    Jorge Ortega-Benitez appealed a district court's denial of relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no merit to Ortega-Benitez's appeal. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning of the district court, which had accepted the recommendation of the magistrate judge to deny Ortega-Benitez's request for relief. The district court also properly declined to resentence Ortega-Benitez under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines because his offenses occurred before the effective date of the guidelines.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1992-01-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 952 F.2d 1396 Docket: 91-7552

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Jorge Ortega-Benitez appealed a district court's denial of relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no merit to Ortega-Benitez's appeal. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning of the district court, which had accepted the recommendation of the magistrate judge to deny Ortega-Benitez's request for relief. The district court also properly declined to resentence Ortega-Benitez under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines because his offenses occurred before the effective date of the guidelines.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    7 views2 pages

    United States v. Jorge Ortega-Benitez, A/K/A Jorge Ortega, 952 F.2d 1396, 4th Cir. (1992)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Jorge Ortega-Benitez appealed a district court's denial of relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no merit to Ortega-Benitez's appeal. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning of the district court, which had accepted the recommendation of the magistrate judge to deny Ortega-Benitez's request for relief. The district court also properly declined to resentence Ortega-Benitez under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines because his offenses occurred before the effective date of the guidelines.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    952 F.

    2d 1396

    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.
    Jorge ORTEGA-BENITEZ, a/k/a Jorge Ortega, DefendantAppellant.
    No. 91-7552.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted June 13, 1991.
    Decided Jan. 21, 1992.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of
    North Carolina, at Charlotte, Nos. CR-84-102-C-CR-P, CA-89-427-C-CP, Robert D. Potter, District Judge.
    Jorge Ortega-Benitez, appellant pro se.
    Thomas J. Ashcraft, United States Attorney, Charlotte, N.C., for appellee.
    W.D.N.C.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before WIDENER, WILKINSON and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:

    Jorge Ortega-Benitez appeals from the district court's order refusing relief
    under 28 U.S.C. 2255. Our review of the record and the district court's

    opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that


    this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
    district court.* United States v. Ortega-Benitez, Nos. CR-84-102-C-CR-P, CA89-427-C-C-P (W.D.N.C. Mar. 4, 1991). 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.

    We note that the district court properly declined to resentence Ortega-Benitez


    under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines because his offenses occurred prior to
    the effective date of the guidelines. See United States v. Polk, 905 F.2d 54 (4th
    Cir.), cert. denied, 59 U.S.L.W. 3391 (U.S.1990)

    You might also like