Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4 views

    United States v. Gerald Hopper, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of Gerald Damone Hopper's "Motion for Access to Judicial Documents" and motion to reconsider. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's rulings. The appeals court therefore affirmed the district court's decision to deny Hopper's motions.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    United States v. Gerald Hopper, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of Gerald Damone Hopper's "Motion for Access to Judicial Documents" and motion to reconsider. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's rulings. The appeals court therefore affirmed the district court's decision to deny Hopper's motions.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-06-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6540

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of Gerald Damone Hopper's "Motion for Access to Judicial Documents" and motion to reconsider. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's rulings. The appeals court therefore affirmed the district court's decision to deny Hopper's motions.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Gerald Hopper, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of Gerald Damone Hopper's "Motion for Access to Judicial Documents" and motion to reconsider. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's rulings. The appeals court therefore affirmed the district court's decision to deny Hopper's motions.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 14-6540

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    GERALD DAMONE HOPPER,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr.,
    District Judge. (3:95-cr-00119-TAW-1)

    Submitted:

    June 19, 2014

    Decided: June 23, 2014

    Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Gerald Damone Hopper, Appellant Pro Se.


    Amy Elizabeth Ray,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Gerald

    Damone

    Hopper

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    orders denying his Motion for Access to Judicial Documents and


    motion to reconsider.
    reversible error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

    by the district court.

    United States v. Hopper, No. 3:95-cr-

    00119-TAW-1 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 7, 2014; Mar. 24, 2014).

    We dispense

    with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
    adequately

    presented

    in

    the

    materials

    before

    this

    court

    and

    argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like