Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Tappin, 99-6085 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-6085 Visitors: 6
Filed: May 18, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6085 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus IVAN CHARLES TAPPIN, a/k/a Lester, a/k/a Wayne L. Smith, a/k/a Lester Smith, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-95-249, CA-98-320-1) Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 18, 1999 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and B
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6085 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus IVAN CHARLES TAPPIN, a/k/a Lester, a/k/a Wayne L. Smith, a/k/a Lester Smith, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-95-249, CA-98-320-1) Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 18, 1999 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ivan Charles Tappin, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston, As- sistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ivan Charles Tappin 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 accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the dis- trict court. See United States v. Tappin, Nos. CR-95-249; CA-98- 320-1 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 18, 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
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