Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Hawkins, 99-7707 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 99-7707 Visitors: 4
Filed: Apr. 20, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7707 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIE RAY HAWKINS, JR., Defendant -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-94-264, CA-98-932) Submitted: April 13, 2000 Decided: April 20, 2000 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unp
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7707 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIE RAY HAWKINS, JR., Defendant -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-94-264, CA-98-932) Submitted: April 13, 2000 Decided: April 20, 2000 Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Willie Ray Hawkins, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Harry L. Hobgood, As- sistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Willie Ray Hawkins, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & 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. Hawkins, Nos. CR-94-264; CA-98- 932 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 16, 1999). 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