Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    14 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which Kenneth Warrix 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 affirmed the district court's ruling, agreeing with the reasoning that Warrix provided no grounds for reversing the lower court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-12-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-6867

    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 court case in which Kenneth Warrix 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 affirmed the district court's ruling, agreeing with the reasoning that Warrix provided no grounds for reversing the lower court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Kenneth Warrix 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 affirmed the district court's ruling, agreeing with the reasoning that Warrix provided no grounds for reversing the lower court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 96-6867

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    KENNETH WARRIX,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert J. Staker, Senior
    District Judge. (CR-88-191, CA-96-93-3)
    Submitted:

    October 31, 1997

    Decided:

    December 3, 1997

    Before HALL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Kenneth Warrix, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Thomas Farrell, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his
    motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (1994) (current version at 28
    U.S.C.A. 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). We have reviewed the
    record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United
    States v. Warrix, Nos. CR-88-191; CA-96-93-3 (S.D.W. Va. May 20,
    1996). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL 338568 (U.S. June
    23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). 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