United States v. Stubbs

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7449 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MELVIN STUBBS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Rockingham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-93-72, CA-94-561-3) Submitted: April 2, 1996 Decided: April 19, 1996 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Melvin Stubbs, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order granting in part and denying in part his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Stubbs, Nos. CR-93-72; CA-94-561-3 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 21, 1995). We note that the district court's finding regarding the timeliness of Appellant's provision of "complete in- formation to the government" was not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Daughtrey, 874 F.2d 213 (4th Cir. 1989); United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual, § 3E1.1(b)(1) (Nov. 1994). In any event, the district court's decision to resentence Appellant in accordance with the plea agreement's acceptance of responsibility provisions eradicated any error that may have occurred in Appellant's original sentence. 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 2