Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. McRae, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding an appeal by Michael Scott McRae of the denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's denial. Accordingly, the Fourth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning of the district court. The Fourth Circuit also noted that a claim raised by McRae under Apprendi v. New Jersey was not cognizable because the new rule announced in Apprendi is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-05-31 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-6020

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding an appeal by Michael Scott McRae of the denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's denial. Accordingly, the Fourth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning of the district court. The Fourth Circuit also noted that a claim raised by McRae under Apprendi v. New Jersey was not cognizable because the new rule announced in Apprendi is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. McRae, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding an appeal by Michael Scott McRae of the denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's denial. Accordingly, the Fourth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning of the district court. The Fourth Circuit also noted that a claim raised by McRae under Apprendi v. New Jersey was not cognizable because the new rule announced in Apprendi is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review.

    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. 01-6020

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    MICHAEL SCOTT MCRAE,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District
    Judge. (CR-97-94-5-H, CA-00-465-5)

    Submitted:

    May 18, 2001

    Decided:

    May 31, 2001

    Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Michael Scott McRae, Appellant Pro Se.
    Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant
    United States Attorney, John Howarth Bennett, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
    STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Michael Scott McRae seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp.
    2000).

    We have reviewed the record and the district courts opin-

    ion and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we deny a certif-

    icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the


    reasoning of the district court.*

    United States v. McRae, Nos. CR-

    97-94-5-H; CA-00-465-5 (E.D.N.C. Dec. 15, 2000).

    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

    We recently held in United States v. Sanders,


    F.3d
    ,
    2001 WL 369719 (4th Cir. Apr. 13, 2001) (No. 00-6281), that the new
    rule announced in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), is
    not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review.
    Accordingly, McRaes Apprendi claim is not cognizable.
    2

    You might also like