Filed: Sep. 27, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6736 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TIMOTHY JAMES DONAHUE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cr-00013-MOC-DCK-3; 3:16-cv- 00558-MOC) Submitted: September 24, 2019 Decided: September 27, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismis
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6736 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TIMOTHY JAMES DONAHUE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cr-00013-MOC-DCK-3; 3:16-cv- 00558-MOC) Submitted: September 24, 2019 Decided: September 27, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismiss..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6736
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TIMOTHY JAMES DONAHUE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr., District Judge. (3:12-cr-00013-MOC-DCK-3; 3:16-cv-
00558-MOC)
Submitted: September 24, 2019 Decided: September 27, 2019
Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Timothy James Donahue, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Timothy James Donahue seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his 28
U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the
Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Donahue’s informal brief does not
challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Donahue has forfeited appellate
review of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey,
775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014).
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2