Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Gregory, 00-7258 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-7258 Visitors: 27
Filed: Dec. 28, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7258 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MAURICE GREGORY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CR-92-163-N, CA-00-78) Submitted: November 28, 2000 Decided: December 28, 2000 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William P. Robins
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7258 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MAURICE GREGORY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CR-92-163-N, CA-00-78) Submitted: November 28, 2000 Decided: December 28, 2000 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William P. Robinson, Jr., Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Vir- ginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Maurice Gregory appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition 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. Gregory, Nos. CR-92-163- N; CA-00-78 (E.D. Va., filed June 19, 2000; entered June 25, 2000). 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 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