Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 32 views

    United States v. Woodberry, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document summarizes two appeals by Christopher Woodberry challenging his convictions for drug and firearm offenses as well as the revocation of his supervised release for a prior fraud conviction. The court affirmed both judgments, finding that the plea colloquy complied with legal requirements and that Woodberry provided no evidence of actual innocence or other factors calling his plea into question. The court also denied Woodberry's claims that the district court erred in denying his recusal motion and allegedly became an advocate for the plea agreement, finding no factual basis to doubt the judge's impartiality.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Woodberry, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    32 views4 pages
    The document summarizes two appeals by Christopher Woodberry challenging his convictions for drug and firearm offenses as well as the revocation of his supervised release for a prior fraud conviction. The court affirmed both judgments, finding that the plea colloquy complied with legal requirements and that Woodberry provided no evidence of actual innocence or other factors calling his plea into question. The court also denied Woodberry's claims that the district court erred in denying his recusal motion and allegedly became an advocate for the plea agreement, finding no factual basis to doubt the judge's impartiality.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-02-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-4157

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes two appeals by Christopher Woodberry challenging his convictions for drug and firearm offenses as well as the revocation of his supervised release for a prior fraud conviction. The court affirmed both judgments, finding that the plea colloquy complied with legal requirements and that Woodberry provided no evidence of actual innocence or other factors calling his plea into question. The court also denied Woodberry's claims that the district court erred in denying his recusal motion and allegedly became an advocate for the plea agreement, finding no factual basis to doubt the judge's impartiality.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    32 views4 pages

    United States v. Woodberry, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document summarizes two appeals by Christopher Woodberry challenging his convictions for drug and firearm offenses as well as the revocation of his supervised release for a prior fraud conviction. The court affirmed both judgments, finding that the plea colloquy complied with legal requirements and that Woodberry provided no evidence of actual innocence or other factors calling his plea into question. The court also denied Woodberry's claims that the district court erred in denying his recusal motion and allegedly became an advocate for the plea agreement, finding no factual basis to doubt the judge's impartiality.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 4

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-4157

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CHRISTOPHER R. WOODBERRY,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    No. 03-4333

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CHRISTOPHER R. WOODBERRY,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Florence.
    C. Weston Houck, Senior District
    Judge; Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CR-99-168; CR-02-40)

    Submitted: December 22, 2003

    Decided:

    February 3, 2004

    Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Christopher R. Woodberry, Appellant Pro Se. William Earl Day, II,


    Rose Mary Parham, Assistant United States Attorneys, Florence,
    South Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    Christopher Woodberry appeals from the two judgments of
    the district court convicting him of conspiring to distribute
    cocaine and ecstasy and possessing a firearm as a convicted felon,
    in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841, 846 (2000), and 18 U.S.C.
    922(g) (2000) (No. 03-4333); and revoking his supervised release
    on a prior conviction for conspiring to defraud the United States,
    in violation of 18 U.S.C. 371 (2000) (No. 03-4157).

    Finding no

    error, we affirm.
    Woodberry claims that the district court erred in denying
    his various motions to withdraw his guilty plea.

    Our review of the

    plea colloquy discloses that it was conducted in full compliance


    with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11.

    Moreover, Woodberry makes no claim of

    actual innocence and raises no additional factors that call into


    question the validity of his plea.
    this claim.

    Accordingly we deny relief on

    See United States v. Moore, 931 F.2d 245, 248 (4th

    Cir. 1991).
    Woodberry also claims that the district court erred in
    denying his motion for recusal and that it became an advocate for
    the plea agreement. (Appellants informal br. at 18). Nothing in
    our

    review

    of

    the

    record

    of

    the

    district

    court

    discloses

    reasonable factual basis for doubting the judges impartiality.


    Consequently, we deny relief on this claim.
    F.2d 818, 827 (4th Cir. 1987).

    - 3 -

    See In re Beard, 811

    We affirm the judgment of the district court.


    deny

    Woodberrys

    pending

    motions

    for

    discovery,

    to

    We also
    correct

    transcripts, to supplement the record on appeal with the name of a


    confidential informant, for a copy of the Governments information,
    to hold the case in abeyance pending resolution of outstanding
    motions, to file a second supplement seeking an audiotape copy of
    his sentencing proceeding, and to compel a Government response to
    pending motions.

    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

    - 4 -

    You might also like