Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Brown, 97-6100 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-6100 Visitors: 36
Filed: Oct. 09, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6100 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus GARY A. BROWN, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-91-297, CA-96-2721-6-13) Submitted: September 23, 1997 Decided: October 9, 1997 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6100 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus GARY A. BROWN, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-91-297, CA-96-2721-6-13) Submitted: September 23, 1997 Decided: October 9, 1997 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary A. Brown, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Harold Watson Gowdy, III, OFFICE OF THE 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997), and order denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Brown, Nos. CR-91-297; CA-96-2721-6-13 (D.S.C. Nov. 22, 1996; Dec. 24, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 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