Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Anthony, 00-6460 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-6460 Visitors: 57
Filed: Aug. 30, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6460 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOSEPH GERALD ANTHONY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Salisbury. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-91-211-S, CA-98-867-1) Submitted: August 24, 2000 Decided: August 30, 2000 Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by un
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6460 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOSEPH GERALD ANTHONY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Salisbury. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-91-211-S, CA-98-867-1) Submitted: August 24, 2000 Decided: August 30, 2000 Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Noell Peter Tin, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. John Warren Stone, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Joseph Gerald Anthony 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 opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge 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. Anthony, Nos. CR-91-211-S; CA- 98-867-1 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 28, 2000). 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