Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    United States v. Thompson, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Charlie Thompson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for relief from his 1989 conviction. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court denied Thompson's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Thompson did not merit relief from his conviction. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary, as the facts and legal issues were clear based on 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. Thompson, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    Charlie Thompson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for relief from his 1989 conviction. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court denied Thompson's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Thompson did not merit relief from his conviction. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary, as the facts and legal issues were clear based on the materials submitted.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2000-06-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 00-6025

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Charlie Thompson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for relief from his 1989 conviction. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court denied Thompson's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Thompson did not merit relief from his conviction. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary, as the facts and legal issues were clear based on the materials submitted.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Thompson, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Charlie Thompson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for relief from his 1989 conviction. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court denied Thompson's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Thompson did not merit relief from his conviction. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary, as the facts and legal issues were clear based on the materials submitted.

    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. 00-6025

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CHARLIE THOMPSON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, District
    Judge. (CR-88-152-G)

    Submitted:

    May 25, 2000

    Decided:

    June 5, 2000

    Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Charlie Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin H. White, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Charlie Thompson seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying his motion for relief from judgment in his 1989 conviction.
    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 on the reasoning of the


    district court.

    See United States v. Thompson, No. CR-88-152-G

    (M.D.N.C. Nov. 3 & Nov. 30, 1999).

    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