Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Logan, 02-7543 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-7543 Visitors: 22
Filed: Jan. 07, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7543 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RONNIE LOGAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-00-68, CA-02-274) Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: January 7, 2003 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam o
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7543 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RONNIE LOGAN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-00-68, CA-02-274) Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: January 7, 2003 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronnie Logan, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ronnie Logan seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Logan has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See United States v. Logan, Nos. CR-00-68; CA-02-274 (W.D.N.C. filed July 29, 2002 & entered July 30, 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
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