Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Queen, 00-7015 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-7015 Visitors: 20
Filed: Nov. 15, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7015 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROLAND DEMINGO QUEEN, a/k/a Mingo, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CR-95-178-WMN, CA-99-1208-WMN) Submitted: November 9, 2000 Decided: November 15, 2000 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7015 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROLAND DEMINGO QUEEN, a/k/a Mingo, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CR-95-178-WMN, CA-99-1208-WMN) Submitted: November 9, 2000 Decided: November 15, 2000 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cheryl D. Stein, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Andrew George Warrens Norman, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Mary- land, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Roland Demingo Queen appeals the district court’s order deny- ing his motion to alter or amend the dismissal of his motion filed pursuant to 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 certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal based upon the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Queen, Nos. CR-95-178-WMN; CA-99-1208-WMN (D. Md. May 22, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials 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