Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Brawley, 95-6728 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-6728 Visitors: 58
Filed: Feb. 01, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-6728 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RICKY JENNINGS BRAWLEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-90-394, CA-94-509-3-6-AK) Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: February 1, 1996 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublishe
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-6728 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RICKY JENNINGS BRAWLEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-90-394, CA-94-509-3-6-AK) Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: February 1, 1996 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Keith Eric Golden, GOLDEN, MEIZLISH & ELWOOD CO., L.P.A., Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant. David Calhoun Stephens, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magis- trate judge, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Ap- pellant's motion to convert this appeal to a formal briefing track and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Brawley, No. CR-90-394; CA-94-509-3-6-AK (D.S.C. Apr. 20, 1995). 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
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