Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Barnes, 97-6981 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-6981 Visitors: 49
Filed: Oct. 09, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6981 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TERRY BARNES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CR-92-58, CA-97-284-5-BR) Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 9, 1997 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Terry Barnes,
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6981 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TERRY BARNES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CR-92-58, CA-97-284-5-BR) Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 9, 1997 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Terry Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 orders denying without prejudice his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997) and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeal- ability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Barnes, Nos. CR-92-58; CA-97-284-5-BR (E.D.N.C. June 12, 1997).* We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED * Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel is hereby denied. 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