United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Stanley Zebulun, A/k/a Carl Rogers, Defendant-appellant, 896 F.2d 1368 (4th Cir. 1990)
Annotate this CaseStanley Zebulun, appellant pro se.
Jamie M. Bennett, Office of the United States Attorney, for appellee.
Before WIDENER and SPROUSE, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
Stanley Zebulun appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence. Zebulun argued that he should have been resentenced after the district court vacated two of his three convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 2113. We disagree. See United States v. Amos, 566 F.2d 899, 901 (4th Cir. 1977). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and oral argument would not significantly aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
