Filed: Mar. 31, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6067 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EMMA J. ALLEN, Defendant - Appellant.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-91-44, CA-97-249) Submitted: March 23, 2000 Decided: March 31, 2000 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emma J. Allen,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6067 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EMMA J. ALLEN, Defendant - Appellant.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-91-44, CA-97-249) Submitted: March 23, 2000 Decided: March 31, 2000 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emma J. Allen, ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6067 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus EMMA J. ALLEN, Defendant - Appellant.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-91-44, CA-97-249) Submitted: March 23, 2000 Decided: March 31, 2000 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Emma J. Allen, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Ann Colombell, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Emma J. Allen seeks to appeal the district court's order deny- ing her motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 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 district court. See United States v. Allen, Nos. CR-91-44; CA-97- 249 (E.D. Va. Nov. 1, 1999). We dispense with oral argument be- cause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2
