Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Ivery, 04-7137 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-7137 Visitors: 64
Filed: Jan. 05, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7137 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DONTRELL L. IVERY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., District Judge. (CR-01-22; CA-03-58) Submitted: December 23, 2004 Decided: January 5, 2005 Before WILKINSON, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dontre
More
                            UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                            No. 04-7137



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus


DONTRELL L. IVERY,

                                             Defendant - Appellant.


Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,
District Judge. (CR-01-22; CA-03-58)


Submitted:   December 23, 2004            Decided:   January 5, 2005


Before WILKINSON, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Dontrell L. Ivery, Appellant Pro Se. David J. Perri, Assistant
United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

            Dontrell L. Ivery seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendations of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Ivery

has   not    made   a   substantial   showing   of   the   denial   of   a

constitutional right. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 
537 U.S. 322
, 336

(2003).     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