Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Fisher, 01-7502 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7502 Visitors: 32
Filed: Mar. 04, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7502 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus PERCY JOE FISHER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Salisbury. William L. Osteen, District Judge. (CR-94-137, CA-96-905-4) Submitted: February 21, 2002 Decided: March 4, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Percy Joe Fish
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7502 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus PERCY JOE FISHER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Salisbury. William L. Osteen, District Judge. (CR-94-137, CA-96-905-4) Submitted: February 21, 2002 Decided: March 4, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Percy Joe Fisher, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Percy Joe Fisher appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider a prior order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Fisher Nos. CR-94-137; CA-96-905-4 (M.D.N.C. filed May 15, 2001 & entered May 16, 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