Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Felsenberg, 97-6939 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-6939 Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 04, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6939 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus STANLEY ZVI FELSENBERG, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederick N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CR-95-408-S, CA-97-1872-S) Submitted: January 22, 1998 Decided: February 4, 1998 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stanley Zvi Fel
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6939 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus STANLEY ZVI FELSENBERG, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederick N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CR-95-408-S, CA-97-1872-S) Submitted: January 22, 1998 Decided: February 4, 1998 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stanley Zvi Felsenberg, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia B. Evans, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997) and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealabil- ity and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Felsenberg, Nos. CR-95-408-S; CA-97-1872-S (D. Md. June 11 and 27, 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