Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 views

    United States v. Ernest, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Ralph Ernest appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court denied Ernest a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's ruling. The Fourth Circuit determined that oral arguments were not necessary because the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    United States v. Ernest, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    Ralph Ernest appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court denied Ernest a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's ruling. The Fourth Circuit determined that oral arguments were not necessary because the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-09-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-7512

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Ralph Ernest appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court denied Ernest a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's ruling. The Fourth Circuit determined that oral arguments were not necessary because the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    1 views2 pages

    United States v. Ernest, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Ralph Ernest appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. The appeals court denied Ernest a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's ruling. The Fourth Circuit determined that oral arguments were not necessary because the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 97-7512

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    RALPH ERNEST, a/k/a Sincere Ernest,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District
    Judge. (CR-90-242-A, CA-97-383-AM)

    Submitted:

    August 27, 1998

    Decided:

    September 10, 1998

    Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Ralph Ernest, Appellant Pro Se.
    Bernard James Apperson, III,
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Ralph Ernest seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.
    1998). We have reviewed the record and the district courts 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. Ernest, Nos. CR-90-242-A; CA-97-383AM (E.D. Va. Sept. 16 and Sept. 22, 1997).

    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

    You might also like