Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Baxter, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Charles Baxter appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The appeals court reviewed the record and denied a certificate of appealability, dismissing the appeal based on the district court's reasoning. The appeals court found Baxter's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding an allegedly duplicitous indictment to be without merit because he failed to establish that he was prejudiced by his counsel's performance as required by Strickland v. Washington. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-06-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-7328

    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 in which Charles Baxter appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The appeals court reviewed the record and denied a certificate of appealability, dismissing the appeal based on the district court's reasoning. The appeals court found Baxter's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding an allegedly duplicitous indictment to be without merit because he failed to establish that he was prejudiced by his counsel's performance as required by Strickland v. Washington. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, 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
    2 views2 pages

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Charles Baxter appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The appeals court reviewed the record and denied a certificate of appealability, dismissing the appeal based on the district court's reasoning. The appeals court found Baxter's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding an allegedly duplicitous indictment to be without merit because he failed to establish that he was prejudiced by his counsel's performance as required by Strickland v. Washington. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, 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. 97-7328

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CHARLES W. BAXTER,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore.
    William M. Nickerson, District Judge.
    (CR-93-122-WN, CA-97-262-WMN)
    Submitted:

    March 3, 1998

    Decided:

    June 2, 1998

    Before MURNAGHAN, ERVIN, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.


    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Charles W. Baxter, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, United
    States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant Charles W. Baxter seeks to appeal the district
    court's order denying 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 a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v.
    Baxter, Nos. CR-93-122-WN; CA-97-262-WMN (D. Md. Aug. 20, 1997). We
    find Baxter's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding
    the allegedly duplicitous indictment meritless because he failed to
    establish that he was prejudiced by counsel's performance. See
    Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694 (1984). 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