Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Payne, 01-7076 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7076 Visitors: 19
Filed: Aug. 17, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7076 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROBERT LAWRENCE PAYNE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CR-90-20-R, CA-96-920-7) Submitted: August 9, 2001 Decided: August 17, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Lawrence Payne
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7076 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROBERT LAWRENCE PAYNE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CR-90-20-R, CA-96-920-7) Submitted: August 9, 2001 Decided: August 17, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Lawrence Payne, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Jack Bondurant, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert L. Payne seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure seeking relief from the order denying his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000) motion. 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 district court. See United States v. Payne, Nos. CR-90-20-R; CA-96-920-7 (W.D. Va. June 18, 2001). 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