Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. De Los Santos-Mora, 01-6470 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-6470 Visitors: 32
Filed: Aug. 02, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6470 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RICARDO ANTONIO DE LOS SANTOS-MORA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-96-49) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: August 2, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ricardo A
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6470 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RICARDO ANTONIO DE LOS SANTOS-MORA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-96-49) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: August 2, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ricardo Antonio De Los Santos-Mora, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Bradenham, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ricardo Antonio De Los Santos-Mora seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the dis- trict court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny De Los Santos-Mora’s motions for a certificate of appeal- ability and to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. De Los Santos-Mora, No. CR-96-49 (E.D. Va. Feb. 15, 2001). 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