Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Jones, 00-7271 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-7271 Visitors: 11
Filed: Feb. 28, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7271 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus STEPHEN T. JONES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Shelby. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-94-5-V, CA-96-147-4-2-V) Submitted: February 22, 2001 Decided: February 28, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublis
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7271 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus STEPHEN T. JONES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Shelby. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-94-5-V, CA-96-147-4-2-V) Submitted: February 22, 2001 Decided: February 28, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stephen T. Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Lee Whisler, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Stephen T. Jones appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to reconsider a prior order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000) motion. Our review of the record and the district court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeal- ability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Jones, Nos. CR-94-5-V; CA-96-147-4-2-V (W.D.N.C. filed Aug. 11, 2000; entered Aug. 14, 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