Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Sutton, 19-4324 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 19-4324 Visitors: 10
Filed: Jun. 06, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6161 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus QUINTON LEON SUTTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR-98-355, CA-01-369-1) Submitted: May 30, 2002 Decided: June 6, 2002 Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles Linwood
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6161 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus QUINTON LEON SUTTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CR-98-355, CA-01-369-1) Submitted: May 30, 2002 Decided: June 6, 2002 Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles Linwood Morgan, Jr., Charlotte, North Carolina; Marcia Gail Shein, LAW OFFICE OF MARCIA G. SHEIN, P.C., Decatur, Georgia, for Appellant. Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Quinton Leon Sutton 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 accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Sutton’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Sutton, Nos. CR- 98-355; CA-01-369-1 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 20, 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