Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Senior, 99-7288 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-7288 Visitors: 25
Filed: Nov. 24, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7288 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WADEROY C.M. SENIOR, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CR-95-74, CA-98-731-3) Submitted: November 18, 1999 Decided: November 24, 1999 Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
More
                            UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                            No. 99-7288



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus


WADEROY C.M. SENIOR,

                                            Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis-
trict Judge. (CR-95-74, CA-98-731-3)


Submitted:   November 18, 1999         Decided:     November 24, 1999


Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Waderoy C.M. Senior, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Waderoy C.M. Senior seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

1999).   We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin-

ion and find no reversible error.    Accordingly, we deny a certif-

icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court.   See United States v. Senior, Nos. CR-95-74;

CA-98-731-3 (E.D. Va. July 27, 1999).   We also note that Senior’s

§ 2255 motion was untimely.   See Brown v. Angelone, 
150 F.3d 370
,

375-76 (4th Cir. 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-

rials 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