Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Muncy, 00-6991 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-6991 Visitors: 19
Filed: Feb. 28, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6991 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CALVIN MERLE MUNCY, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Wilmington. W. Earl Britt, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CR-97-81, CA-00-3-7-BR) Submitted: February 22, 2001 Decided: February 28, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed b
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6991 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CALVIN MERLE MUNCY, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Wilmington. W. Earl Britt, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CR-97-81, CA-00-3-7-BR) Submitted: February 22, 2001 Decided: February 28, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Calvin Merle Muncy, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Christine Witcover Dean, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Calvin Merle Muncy, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin- ion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certif- icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Muncy, Nos. CR-97-81; CA-00- 3-7-BR (E.D.N.C. June 23, 2000). We deny Muncy’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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
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