Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Wright, 01-7312 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7312 Visitors: 23
Filed: Jan. 02, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7312 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALPHONSO A. WRIGHT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CR-91-35-ST-MU, CA-01-17-1-5-MU) Submitted: December 20, 2001 Decided: January 2, 2002 Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7312 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALPHONSO A. WRIGHT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CR-91-35-ST-MU, CA-01-17-1-5-MU) Submitted: December 20, 2001 Decided: January 2, 2002 Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alphonso A. Wright, Appellant Pro Se. Harry Thomas Church, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Alphonso A. Wright seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of the order dismissing 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 appeal- ability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Wright, Nos. CR-91-35-ST-MU; CA-01-17-1-5- MU (W.D.N.C. May 30, 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