Filed: Oct. 20, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6927 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MIGUEL PEGLERA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CR-93-58, CA-97-81-5-BO) Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 20, 1998 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mig
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6927 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MIGUEL PEGLERA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CR-93-58, CA-97-81-5-BO) Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 20, 1998 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Migu..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6927 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MIGUEL PEGLERA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CR-93-58, CA-97-81-5-BO) Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 20, 1998 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Miguel Peglera, Appellant Pro Se. Christine Blaise Hamilton, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Miguel Peglera seeks to appeal the district court’s order de- nying his motion for reconsideration of an 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 appealabil- ity and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Peglera, Nos. CR-93-58; CA-97-81-5-BO (E.D.N.C. May 5, 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. DISMISSED 2