Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Tapia-Santana, 01-7584 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7584 Visitors: 49
Filed: Jan. 09, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7584 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LAZARO TAPIA-SANTANA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CR-93-62-BR, CA-00-864-BR) Submitted: December 20, 2001 Decided: January 9, 2002 Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7584 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LAZARO TAPIA-SANTANA, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CR-93-62-BR, CA-00-864-BR) Submitted: December 20, 2001 Decided: January 9, 2002 Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lazaro Tapia-Santana, Appellant Pro Se. Jane H. Jolly, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Lazaro Tapia-Santana seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) and his motion to alter or amend judgment. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders and find 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. Tapia-Santana, Nos. CR-93-62-BR; CA-00- 864-BR (E.D.N.C. Jan. 18, 2001; Feb. 5, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly 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