Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Ralph C. Shipp v. United States, 92-6349 (1992)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 92-6349 Visitors: 26
Filed: Jun. 12, 1992
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 966 F.2d 1444 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Ralph C. SHIPP, Defendant-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee. No. 92-6349. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: June 1, 1992 Decided: June 12, 1992 Appeal from the United States Distr
More

966 F.2d 1444

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Ralph C. SHIPP, Defendant-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee.

No. 92-6349.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 1, 1992
Decided: June 12, 1992

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. William M. Kidd, Senior District Judge. (CR-88-102-K, CA-92-9-E-K)

Ralph C. Shipp, Appellant Pro Se.

William Anthony Kolibash, United States Attorney, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee.

N.D.W.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before PHILLIPS, WILKINSON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Ralph C. Shipp appeals from the district court's orders refusing relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988), and denying his motion for reconsideration. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for reconsideration. See United States v. Polk, 905 F.2d 54 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 59 U.S.L.W. 3391 (U.S. 1990). Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Shipp, Nos. CR-88-102-K, CA-92-9-E-K (N.D.W. Va. Jan. 22 and Feb. 13, 1992). 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

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