Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Higgins, 00-6973 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-6973 Visitors: 13
Filed: Dec. 21, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6973 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus PAULETTE A. HIGGINS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CR-98-429, CA-99-1264-AM) Submitted: December 14, 2000 Decided: December 21, 2000 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Paule
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6973 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus PAULETTE A. HIGGINS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CR-98-429, CA-99-1264-AM) Submitted: December 14, 2000 Decided: December 21, 2000 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Paulette A. Higgins, Appellant Pro Se. John Patrick Pierce, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Paulette A. Higgins seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying her motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s de- cision rendered from the bench and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court as reflected in the transcript of the June 14, 2000, hearing. United States v. Higgins, Nos. CR-98-429; CA-99-1264-AM (E.D. Va. filed June 14, 2000; entered June 15, 2000). 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