Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Bullock, 01-7598 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7598 Visitors: 14
Filed: Jan. 30, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7598 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOSEPH BULLOCK, III, a/k/a Bay, a/k/a Anthony B. Bullock, a/k/a Anthony Benjamin Bullock, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CR-98-150, CA-00-347) Submitted: January 16, 2002 Decided: January 30, 2002 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit J
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7598 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOSEPH BULLOCK, III, a/k/a Bay, a/k/a Anthony B. Bullock, a/k/a Anthony Benjamin Bullock, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CR-98-150, CA-00-347) Submitted: January 16, 2002 Decided: January 30, 2002 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Bullock, III, Appellant Pro Se. David John Novak, John Staige Davis, V, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Joseph Bullock, III, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a cer- tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Bullock, Nos. CR-98- 150; CA-00-347 (E.D. Va. Aug. 24, 2001). We also deny Bullock’s motion to compel production of medical records. 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