Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Camps, 01-7814 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7814 Visitors: 23
Filed: Apr. 01, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7814 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DARRYL PERNELL CAMPS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CR-90-85, CA-01-374-2-MU) Submitted: March 20, 2002 Decided: April 1, 2002 Before LUTTIG, WIDENER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darryl P
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7814 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DARRYL PERNELL CAMPS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CR-90-85, CA-01-374-2-MU) Submitted: March 20, 2002 Decided: April 1, 2002 Before LUTTIG, WIDENER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darryl Pernell Camps, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Timothy Calloway, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Darryl Pernell Camps appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders 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. Camps, Nos. CR-90-85; CA-01-374-2-MU (W.D.N.C. filed July 25, 2001, entered July 27, 2001; filed Aug. 15, 2001, entered Aug. 16, 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