Filed: Jul. 27, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6308 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EUSTACE BROWN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (CR-94-52, CA-99-20-3) Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eustace Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Th
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6308 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EUSTACE BROWN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (CR-94-52, CA-99-20-3) Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eustace Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Tho..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6308 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EUSTACE BROWN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (CR-94-52, CA-99-20-3) Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eustace Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Oliver Mucklow, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Eustace Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s order deny- ing his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the dis- trict court. See United States v. Brown, Nos. CR-94-52; CA-99-20-3 (N.D.W. Va. Dec. 14, 1999). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2
