Filed: Apr. 28, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7062 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DEXTER LEON BOWEN, a/k/a Dexter Leon Bowens, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-95-539, CA-97-1877-6-13) Submitted: March 24, 1998 Decided: April 28, 1998 Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curia
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7062 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DEXTER LEON BOWEN, a/k/a Dexter Leon Bowens, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-95-539, CA-97-1877-6-13) Submitted: March 24, 1998 Decided: April 28, 1998 Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7062 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DEXTER LEON BOWEN, a/k/a Dexter Leon Bowens, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-95-539, CA-97-1877-6-13) Submitted: March 24, 1998 Decided: April 28, 1998 Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dexter Leon Bowen, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of ap- pealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Bowens, Nos. CR-95-539; CA-97-1877-6-13 (D.S.C. July 17, 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
