Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Michael Ray Smith Jr, 00-6559 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-6559 Visitors: 28
Filed: Jul. 24, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6559 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MICHAEL RAY SMITH, JR., a/k/a Red, a/k/a Black Mike, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CR-97-3006, CA-99-465-7) Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: July 24, 2000 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpubli
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6559 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MICHAEL RAY SMITH, JR., a/k/a Red, a/k/a Black Mike, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CR-97-3006, CA-99-465-7) Submitted: July 13, 2000 Decided: July 24, 2000 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Ray Smith, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Ray B. Fitzgerald, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Michael Ray Smith, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a cer- tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Smith, Nos. CR-97- 3006; CA-99-465-7 (W.D. Va. Mar. 17, 2000). 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. DISMISSED 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer