Filed: Jun. 19, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6549 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MYRNA JOSEPHINE HOLT WILSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge; Glen E. Conrad, Magistrate Judge. (CR-98-91, CA-00-423-7) Submitted: June 13, 2002 Decided: June 19, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpubli
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6549 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MYRNA JOSEPHINE HOLT WILSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge; Glen E. Conrad, Magistrate Judge. (CR-98-91, CA-00-423-7) Submitted: June 13, 2002 Decided: June 19, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublis..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6549 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus MYRNA JOSEPHINE HOLT WILSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge; Glen E. Conrad, Magistrate Judge. (CR-98-91, CA-00-423-7) Submitted: June 13, 2002 Decided: June 19, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Myra Josephine Holt Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Sharon Burnham, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Myra Josephine Holt Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying her 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 certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Wilson, Nos. CR- 98-91; CA-00-423-7 (W.D. Va. Jan. 25, 2002). 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