Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Taylor, 96-6860 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6860 Visitors: 5
Filed: Oct. 15, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6860 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CLINTON F. TAYLOR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-91-58, CA-95-23-NN) Submitted: October 3, 1996 Decided: October 15, 1996 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Francis M
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6860 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CLINTON F. TAYLOR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-91-58, CA-95-23-NN) Submitted: October 3, 1996 Decided: October 15, 1996 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Francis McQuaid Lawrence, ST. JOHN, BOWLING & LAWRENCE, Charlottes- ville, Virginia, for Appellant. Harvey Lee Bryant, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 (1988), amended by Antiter- rorism 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 reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Taylor, Nos. CR-91-58; CA-95-23-NN (E.D. Va. Mar. 29, 1996). 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 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