Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Nance, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. The court denied without prejudice Jimmy Lawrence Nance's motion to appeal the district court's denial of his §2255 motion. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It denied Nance's requests for appointment of counsel, transcript preparation at government expense, general relief, and to preclude the Assistant U.S. Attorney. The court also denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments adequately presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-10-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-7049

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. The court denied without prejudice Jimmy Lawrence Nance's motion to appeal the district court's denial of his §2255 motion. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It denied Nance's requests for appointment of counsel, transcript preparation at government expense, general relief, and to preclude the Assistant U.S. Attorney. The court also denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments adequately presented.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Nance, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case. The court denied without prejudice Jimmy Lawrence Nance's motion to appeal the district court's denial of his §2255 motion. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It denied Nance's requests for appointment of counsel, transcript preparation at government expense, general relief, and to preclude the Assistant U.S. Attorney. The court also denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments adequately presented.

    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. 97-7049

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    JIMMY LAWRENCE NANCE,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.
    (CR-92-135-R, CA-97-473-R)
    Submitted:

    September 25, 1997

    Decided:

    October 10, 1997

    Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.


    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Jimmy Lawrence Nance, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Linn Eckert, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying
    without prejudice his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West
    1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district
    court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny
    Appellant's motions for appointment of counsel, for preparation of
    a transcript at government expense, for general relief, and to preclude the Assistant United States Attorney from these proceedings,
    deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal on the
    reasoning of the district court. United States v. Nance, Nos. CR92-135-R; CA-97-473-R (W.D. Va. July 9, 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