Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. McMillon, 01-7642 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7642 Visitors: 20
Filed: Jan. 14, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7642 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LESTER RAY MCMILLON, a/k/a Baby Ray McMillon, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CR-98-105, CA-01-367-5-BO) Submitted: December 19, 2001 Decided: January 14, 2002 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublishe
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7642 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LESTER RAY MCMILLON, a/k/a Baby Ray McMillon, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CR-98-105, CA-01-367-5-BO) Submitted: December 19, 2001 Decided: January 14, 2002 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lester Ray McMillon, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Lester Ray McMillon, 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 opin- ion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certif- icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. McMillon, Nos. CR-98-105; CA-01-367-5-BO (E.D.N.C. filed Aug. 31, 2001; entered Sept. 4, 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