Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2 views

    United States v. Thomas, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal by Lyndell Thomas of a district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's opinion. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its July 2, 1998 ruling.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    United States v. Thomas, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    This document is a court ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal by Lyndell Thomas of a district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's opinion. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its July 2, 1998 ruling.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-03-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 98-7332

    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 ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal by Lyndell Thomas of a district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's opinion. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its July 2, 1998 ruling.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Thomas, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal by Lyndell Thomas of a district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's opinion. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its July 2, 1998 ruling.

    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. 98-7332

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    LYNDELL THOMAS, a/k/a X-Man,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. W. Earl Britt, Senior
    District Judge. (CR-93-58, CA-98-514-5-BR)

    Submitted:

    February 25, 1999

    Decided:

    March 8, 1999

    Before HAMILTON, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Lyndell Thomas, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Lyndell Thomas seeks to appeal the district courts order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.
    1998).

    We have reviewed the record and the district courts opin-

    ion and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we deny a certifi-

    cate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of


    the district court.

    See United States v. Thomas, Nos. CR-93-58;

    CA-98-514-5-BR (E.D.N.C. July 2, 1998).

    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