US v. Albert Burgess, No. 19-6135 (4th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6135 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ALBERT CHARLES BURGESS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (1:09-cr-00017-GCM-DLH-1) Submitted: June 25, 2019 Before MOTZ, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Albert Charles Burgess, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Decided: June 28, 2019 PER CURIAM: Albert Charles Burgess, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for sanctions against the Government. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Burgess’ motion predicated on the Government’s alleged violations of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1967), and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), because the allegedly untimely disclosed evidence on which Burgess relied was not withheld in violation of these decisions. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial order. United States v. Burgess, No. 1:09-cr-00017-GCM-DLH-1 (W.D.N.C. Jan. 7, 2019). We deny Burgess’ motion to appoint counsel and 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 2
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.
