Filed: Jul. 20, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6455 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JASON J. SMITH, a/k/a Phillip Daniel Smith, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (CR-97-17, CA-00-21-3) Submitted: July 3, 2001 Decided: July 20, 2001 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6455 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JASON J. SMITH, a/k/a Phillip Daniel Smith, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (CR-97-17, CA-00-21-3) Submitted: July 3, 2001 Decided: July 20, 2001 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curia..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6455 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JASON J. SMITH, a/k/a Phillip Daniel Smith, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (CR-97-17, CA-00-21-3) Submitted: July 3, 2001 Decided: July 20, 2001 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Paul E. Lane, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellant. 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Jason J. Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s order de- nying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000). 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 deny a certificate of appeal- ability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Smith, Nos. CR-97-17; CA-00-21-3 (N.D.W. Va. Feb. 9, 2001). 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