Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Coor, 96-6713 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6713 Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 01, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6713 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus BEAUTANOUS COOR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CR-92-72-5-F, CA-95-974-5-F) Submitted: October 15, 1996 Decided: November 1, 1996 Before HALL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Beautanou
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6713 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus BEAUTANOUS COOR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CR-92-72-5-F, CA-95-974-5-F) Submitted: October 15, 1996 Decided: November 1, 1996 Before HALL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Beautanous Coor, Appellant Pro Se. Jane H. Jolly, Assistant 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 appeals the district court's order denying his mo- tion for reconsideration of the court's earlier order denying his various motions, including a motion filed under 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no abuse of dis- cretion. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Coor, Nos. CR-92-72-5-F; CA-95-974-5-F (E.D.N.C. Jan. 19, Feb. 5, & Apr. 15, 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
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