United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Robert Watson, Iii, Defendant-appellant, 7 F.3d 228 (4th Cir. 1993)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CR-90-28, CA-92-501)
Robert Watson, III, Appellant Pro Se.
Christine Witcover Dean, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
E.D.N.C.
AFFIRMED.
Before WIDENER and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
OPINION
Robert Watson, III, appeals from the district court's order refusing relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses no abuse of discretion and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.* United States v. Watson, Nos. CR-90-28; CA92-501 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 3, & Aug. 16, 1992). 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
We find that Watson's attack on the length of his sentence imposed upon the revocation of his probation, as opposed to the revocation of the supervised release term, does not merit relief. See Courtney v. United States, 518 F.2d 514, 515 (4th Cir. 1975) (adverse collateral legal consequences required)
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.
