From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Magdaleno

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Apr 5, 2010
372 F. App'x 372 (4th Cir. 2010)

Opinion

Nos. 09-8191, 10-6254.

Submitted: March 30, 2010.

Decided: April 5, 2010.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (7:06-cr-00703-GRA-2).

Ivan Magdaleno, Appellant Pro Se. Jimmie Ewing, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


Ivan Magdaleno appeals the district court's orders denying his motion for specific performance of his plea agreement pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b), his motion for reconsideration of that denial, and his motion to reopen the case. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Magdaleno, No. 7:06-cr00703-GRA-2, 2009 WL 4432577 (D.S.C. Nov. 9, 2009; Nov. 25, 2009); 2010 WL 360508 (Jan. 26, 2010). 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.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Magdaleno

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Apr 5, 2010
372 F. App'x 372 (4th Cir. 2010)
Case details for

U.S. v. Magdaleno

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ivan MAGDALENO…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Apr 5, 2010

Citations

372 F. App'x 372 (4th Cir. 2010)

Citing Cases

Cole v. United States

Accordingly, even under a liberal construction, the Motion for Transcripts is not a § 2255 petition. See…