Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Blackwell, 97-6336 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-6336 Visitors: 49
Filed: Sep. 16, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6336 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RODNEY LEE BLACKWELL, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Sr., District Judge. (CR-94-115, CA-96-910-2) Submitted: August 28, 1997 Decided: September 16, 1997 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinio
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6336 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RODNEY LEE BLACKWELL, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Sr., District Judge. (CR-94-115, CA-96-910-2) Submitted: August 28, 1997 Decided: September 16, 1997 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney Lee Blackwell, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Michael Hamilton, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. ยง 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion ac- cepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no re- versible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Blackwell, Nos. CR-94-115; CA-96-910-2 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 20, 1997). 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. 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