Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Robbins, 01-7264 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7264 Visitors: 28
Filed: Oct. 12, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7264 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TYSON TERRILL ROBBINS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-94-170, CA-01-211-3) Submitted: October 4, 2001 Decided: October 12, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tyso
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7264 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TYSON TERRILL ROBBINS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-94-170, CA-01-211-3) Submitted: October 4, 2001 Decided: October 12, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tyson Terrill Robbins, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Tyson Terrill Robbins 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 district court’s opin- ion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Robbins’ motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Robbins, Nos. CR-94-170; CA-01-211-3 (W.D.N.C. May 23, 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