Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Reynolds, 99-6093 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-6093 Visitors: 15
Filed: Aug. 06, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6093 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CARL REYNOLDS, a/k/a Neal, a/k/a Jermaine Azore, a/k/a Karl Reynolds, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Elizabeth V. Hallanan, Senior District Judge. (CR-95-71, CA-98-381-5) Submitted: June 22, 1999 Decided: August 6, 1999 Before HAMILTON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Di
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6093 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CARL REYNOLDS, a/k/a Neal, a/k/a Jermaine Azore, a/k/a Karl Reynolds, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Elizabeth V. Hallanan, Senior District Judge. (CR-95-71, CA-98-381-5) Submitted: June 22, 1999 Decided: August 6, 1999 Before HAMILTON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carl Reynolds, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Carl Reynolds seeks to appeal the district court’s order deny- ing his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion 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. Reynolds, Nos. CR-95-71; CA-98- 381-5 (S.D.W. Va. Jan. 12, 1999). 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