Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    United States v. Paul Kirk, 996 F.2d 1213, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Paul Kirk appealed the district court's denial of relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its opinion dated February 9, 1993. The Fourth Circuit found oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the materials submitted.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    United States v. Paul Kirk, 996 F.2d 1213, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Paul Kirk appealed the district court's denial of relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its opinion dated February 9, 1993. The Fourth Circuit found oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the materials submitted.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1993-06-24 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 996 F.2d 1213 Docket: 93-6265

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Paul Kirk appealed the district court's denial of relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its opinion dated February 9, 1993. The Fourth Circuit found oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the materials submitted.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Paul Kirk, 996 F.2d 1213, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Paul Kirk appealed the district court's denial of relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal lacked merit. The Fourth Circuit affirmed based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its opinion dated February 9, 1993. The Fourth Circuit found oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the materials submitted.

    Copyright:

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

    996 F.

    2d 1213

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.
    Paul KIRK, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 93-6265.

    United States Court of Appeals,


    Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 7, 1993.
    Decided: June 24, 1993.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,
    at Baltimore. Herbert F. Murray, Senior District Judge. (CR-76-370-HM,
    CA-92-3077-HM)
    Paul Kirk, Appellant Pro Se.
    Jamie M. Bennett, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland,
    for Appellee.
    D.Md.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before HALL, WILKINSON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    OPINION
    1

    Paul Kirk appeals from the district court's order refusing relief under 28 U.S.C.

    2255 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion
    discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the
    reasoning of the district court. United States v. Kirk, Nos. CR-76-370-HM, CA92-3077-HM (D. Md. Feb. 9, 1993). 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.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like