Filed: Aug. 30, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7041 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALEJANDRO DEJESUS HERNANDEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:91-cr-00139-CMH) Submitted: August 23, 2007 Decided: August 30, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished p
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7041 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALEJANDRO DEJESUS HERNANDEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:91-cr-00139-CMH) Submitted: August 23, 2007 Decided: August 30, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished pe..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7041 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALEJANDRO DEJESUS HERNANDEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:91-cr-00139-CMH) Submitted: August 23, 2007 Decided: August 30, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alejandro DeJesus Hernandez, Appellant Pro Se. Bernard James Apperson, III, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Alejandro DeJesus Hernandez appeals a district court order denying us untimely his Rule 60(b) motion seeking reconsideration of the 1997 denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. We affirm because the district court was without jurisdiction to consider the motion because Hernandez had not received authorization from this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (2000). To the extent Hernandez seeks authorization, we deny the request. 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. AFFIRMED - 2 -