Filed: Jul. 14, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6380 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JERRY BURKES, a/k/a Gary Burkes, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (CR-89-205, CA-97-282) Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 14, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING,* Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6380 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JERRY BURKES, a/k/a Gary Burkes, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (CR-89-205, CA-97-282) Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 14, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING,* Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opini..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-6380
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JERRY BURKES, a/k/a Gary Burkes,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis-
trict of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr.,
District Judge. (CR-89-205, CA-97-282)
Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 14, 1999
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING,* Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jerry Burkes, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).
*
Judge King did not participate in consideration of this
case. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 46(d) (1994).
PER CURIAM:
Jerry Burkes 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. Burkes, Nos. CR-89-205; CA-97-
282 (S.D.W. Va. Feb. 19, 1999).* In light of this disposition,
Burkes’ motion to place his appeal in abeyance is hereby denied.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-
tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court
and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
*
Although the district court’s order is dated February 18,
1999, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the
docket sheet on February 19, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the
order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective
date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray,
806
F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
2