Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Kemp, 01-7122 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7122 Visitors: 6
Filed: Oct. 18, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7122 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KENNETH W. KEMP, a/k/a El, a/k/a Al, a/k/a Lamont, a/k/a L, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CR-93-117, CA-00-960-2) Submitted: October 3, 2001 Decided: October 18, 2001 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Jud
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7122 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KENNETH W. KEMP, a/k/a El, a/k/a Al, a/k/a Lamont, a/k/a L, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CR-93-117, CA-00-960-2) Submitted: October 3, 2001 Decided: October 18, 2001 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth W. Kemp, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Kenneth W. Kemp seeks to appeal the district court’s order de- nying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001). 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. United States v. Kemp, Nos. CR-93-117; CA-00-960-2 (E.D. Va. Apr. 25, 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
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