Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case where Claude St. Juste appealed the denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error. It denied St. Juste a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as presented in case numbers CR-95-4-BR and CA-97-137-5-BR. The Court of Appeals dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials provided to the court.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-02-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-6473

    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 where Claude St. Juste appealed the denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error. It denied St. Juste a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as presented in case numbers CR-95-4-BR and CA-97-137-5-BR. The Court of Appeals dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials provided to the court.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. St. Juste, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case where Claude St. Juste appealed the denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error. It denied St. Juste a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as presented in case numbers CR-95-4-BR and CA-97-137-5-BR. The Court of Appeals dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials provided to the court.

    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. 97-6473

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CLAUDE ST. JUSTE,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CR-95-4-BR, CA-97-137-5-BR)
    Submitted:

    February 12, 1998

    Decided:

    February 26, 1998

    Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Claude St. Juste, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant 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 on the reasoning of the district
    court. United States v. St. Juste, Nos. CR-95-4-BR; CA-97-137-5-BR
    (E.D.N.C. Mar. 4, 1997). 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