Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Hicks, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Reggie Eugene Hicks. The court had reviewed Hicks' motion to appeal the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 and found no reversible error. Accordingly, the appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as outlined in United States v. Hicks, Nos. CR-99-316, CA-01-235 (E.D. Va. Jan. 11, 2002). The court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-06-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-6486

    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 is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Reggie Eugene Hicks. The court had reviewed Hicks' motion to appeal the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 and found no reversible error. Accordingly, the appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as outlined in United States v. Hicks, Nos. CR-99-316, CA-01-235 (E.D. Va. Jan. 11, 2002). The court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were 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. Hicks, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Reggie Eugene Hicks. The court had reviewed Hicks' motion to appeal the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 and found no reversible error. Accordingly, the appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as outlined in United States v. Hicks, Nos. CR-99-316, CA-01-235 (E.D. Va. Jan. 11, 2002). The court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were 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. 02-6486

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    REGGIE EUGENE HICKS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    James R. Spencer, District
    Judge. (CR-99-316, CA-01-235)

    Submitted:

    June 4, 2002

    Decided:

    June 21, 2002

    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Reggie Eugene Hicks, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Ronald Hood, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Reggie Eugene Hicks seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp.
    2001). 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 substantially on the


    reasoning of the district court.

    See United States v. Hicks, Nos.

    CR-99-316, CA-01-235 (E.D. Va. Jan. 11, 2002).

    We dispense with

    oral

    contentions

    argument

    because

    the

    facts

    and

    legal

    are

    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument


    would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like