Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Polite, 02-6898 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-6898 Visitors: 13
Filed: Sep. 10, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6898 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KERJI POLITE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CR-97-943, CA-01-437-23-2) Submitted: September 5, 2002 Decided: September 10, 2002 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kerji Polite, App
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6898 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KERJI POLITE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CR-97-943, CA-01-437-23-2) Submitted: September 5, 2002 Decided: September 10, 2002 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kerji Polite, Appellant Pro Se. Miller Williams Shealy, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Kerji Polite seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and conclude on the reasoning of the district court that Polite has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See United States v. Polite, Nos. CR-97-943; CA-01-437-23-2 (D.S.C. filed May 21, 2002, entered May 22, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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