Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Leigh, 97-7195 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-7195 Visitors: 21
Filed: Jul. 17, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7195 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus YVONNE RENE LEIGH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-94-406-A, CA-97-1087-AM) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 17, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7195 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus YVONNE RENE LEIGH, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CR-94-406-A, CA-97-1087-AM) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 17, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Yvonne Rene Leigh, Appellant Pro Se. Leslie Bonner McClendon, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 her motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. We decline to address the district court’s comment that Appellant’s § 2255 motion was barred by the one-year limitations period imposed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1998), because we find that the district court correctly denied Appellant’s motion on alternative grounds. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the district court’s finding that Appellant’s downward departure claims could not be raised in a § 2255 proceeding and its determination that her sentencing claim was barred because it had been raised on direct appeal. United States v. Leigh, Nos. CR-94-406-A; CA-97-1087-AM (E.D. Va. July 29, 1997). 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