Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Thompson, 97-7327 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-7327 Visitors: 31
Filed: Oct. 19, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7327 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ERNEST D. THOMPSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CR-88-19-R, CA-97-529-3) Submitted: July 30, 1998 Decided: October 19, 1998 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ernest D. Thompso
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7327 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ERNEST D. THOMPSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CR-88-19-R, CA-97-529-3) Submitted: July 30, 1998 Decided: October 19, 1998 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ernest D. Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. N. George Metcalf, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998) and his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Thompson, Nos. CR-88-19-R; CA-97-529-3 (E.D. Va. July 16, 1997 & Aug 28, 1997); see also Brown v. Angelone, ___ F.3d ___, No. 96-7173 (4th Cir. July 14, 1998). 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. AFFIRMED 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