Filed: Jul. 09, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6615 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALEJANDRO DEJESUS HERNANDEZ, a/k/a Kamarky, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CR-91-139-A, CA-97-869-AM) Submitted: June 23, 1998 Decided: July 9, 1998 Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6615 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALEJANDRO DEJESUS HERNANDEZ, a/k/a Kamarky, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CR-91-139-A, CA-97-869-AM) Submitted: June 23, 1998 Decided: July 9, 1998 Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6615 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALEJANDRO DEJESUS HERNANDEZ, a/k/a Kamarky, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CR-91-139-A, CA-97-869-AM) Submitted: June 23, 1998 Decided: July 9, 1998 Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alejandro Dejesus Hernandez, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas More Hollen- horst, Assistant United States Attorney, Bernard James Apperson, III, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 his 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. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of ap- pealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Hernandez, Nos. CR-91-139-A; CA-97-869-AM (E.D. Va. Oct. 14, 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