Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Wheeler, 96-7044 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-7044 Visitors: 15
Filed: Jan. 24, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7044 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FRAZER ARTHUR WHEELER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CR-92-92, CA-96-557) Submitted: December 17, 1996 Decided: January 24, 1997 Before WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished p
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7044 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FRAZER ARTHUR WHEELER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CR-92-92, CA-96-557) Submitted: December 17, 1996 Decided: January 24, 1997 Before WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frazer Arthur Wheeler, Appellant Pro Se. S. David Schiller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 for relief under 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 (1994), amended by Anti- terrorism 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. Wheeler, Nos. CR-92-92; CA-96-557 (E.D. Va. June 24, 1996). Appellant's motion to strike the Govern- ment's informal brief is denied. 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 deci- sional 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