Filed: Sep. 05, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6561 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus SEVERO LOPEZ, JR., a/k/a Tono, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge. (CR-93-150-P, CA-95-373-P) Submitted: August 22, 1996 Decided: September 5, 1996 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6561 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus SEVERO LOPEZ, JR., a/k/a Tono, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge. (CR-93-150-P, CA-95-373-P) Submitted: August 22, 1996 Decided: September 5, 1996 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6561
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
SEVERO LOPEZ, JR., a/k/a Tono,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior
District Judge. (CR-93-150-P, CA-95-373-P)
Submitted: August 22, 1996 Decided: September 5, 1996
Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Severo Lopez, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Harry Thomas Church, Assistant
United States Attorney, Charlotte, North 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm on the rea-
soning of the district court. United States v. Lopez, Nos. CR-93-
150-P, CA-95-373-P (W.D.N.C. Mar. 8, 1996). 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