Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Perez, 98-6325 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-6325 Visitors: 125
Filed: Jul. 27, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6325 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOSE ANGEL PEREZ, a/k/a Angel, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CR-93-26-F, CA-97-85-7-F) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 27, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished pe
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6325 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOSE ANGEL PEREZ, a/k/a Angel, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CR-93-26-F, CA-97-85-7-F) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 27, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jay Stephen Neisen, ZIMMER & ZIMMER, Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellant. Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant United States At- torney, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of ap- pealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Perez, Nos. CR-93-26-F; CA-97-85-7-F (E.D.N.C. Dec. 4, 1997). 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