Filed: Jun. 16, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6327 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FELIX ORIAKHI, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR- 90-72-PJM, CA-98-3445-PJM) Submitted: May 11, 1999 Decided: June 16, 1999 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fel
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6327 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FELIX ORIAKHI, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR- 90-72-PJM, CA-98-3445-PJM) Submitted: May 11, 1999 Decided: June 16, 1999 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Feli..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6327 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FELIX ORIAKHI, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR- 90-72-PJM, CA-98-3445-PJM) Submitted: May 11, 1999 Decided: June 16, 1999 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Felix Oriakhi, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Reeves Harding, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Felix Oriakhi, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying his petition for a writ of error coram nobis and declining to construe his petition as arising 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. Ac- cordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Oriakhi, Nos. CR-90-72-PJM; CA-98-3445-PJM (D. Md. Mar. 5, 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. AFFIRMED 2