Filed: Oct. 21, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7225 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALVIN JERONES PURDIE, JR., a/k/a Purdie Boy, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-94-46, CA-02-191-H) Submitted: October 10, 2002 Decided: October 21, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7225 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALVIN JERONES PURDIE, JR., a/k/a Purdie Boy, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-94-46, CA-02-191-H) Submitted: October 10, 2002 Decided: October 21, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7225 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ALVIN JERONES PURDIE, JR., a/k/a Purdie Boy, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-94-46, CA-02-191-H) Submitted: October 10, 2002 Decided: October 21, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alvin Jerones Purdie, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Christine Blaise Hamilton, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Alvin Purdie seeks to appeal the district court’s judgment denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Purdie has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See United States v. Purdie, Nos. CR-94-46; CA-02-191-H (E.D.N.C. filed June 14, 2002; entered June 17, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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