Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Cobbs, 02-6834 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-6834 Visitors: 40
Filed: Oct. 08, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6834 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOHN LEE COBBS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CR-95-193) Submitted: September 23, 2002 Decided: October 8, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Lee Cobbs, Appellant Pro Se. Lau
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6834 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOHN LEE COBBS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CR-95-193) Submitted: September 23, 2002 Decided: October 8, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Lee Cobbs, Appellant Pro Se. Laura P. Tayman, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: John Lee Cobbs appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a)(1) (2000). The district court properly construed this action as a successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and dismissed the motion because Cobbs did not obtain authorization from this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal and dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Cobbs, No. CR-95-193 (E.D. Va. June 24, 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