Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Henry, 02-6979 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-6979 Visitors: 20
Filed: Sep. 23, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6979 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CARLTON ELSWORTH HENRY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-95-75, CA-01-10-1) Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 23, 2002 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6979 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CARLTON ELSWORTH HENRY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-95-75, CA-01-10-1) Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 23, 2002 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carlton Elsworth Henry, Appellant Pro Se. Clifton Thomas Barrett, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Carlton Elsworth Henry seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2002). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Henry, Nos. CR-95-75; CA-01-10-1 (M.D.N.C. June 6, 2002). 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