Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Milton, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Gregory Allen Milton's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, denial of his motion for reconsideration, and denial of his motion for a certificate of appealability. The Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's rulings. The Fourth Circuit also denied Milton's motion to place his appeal in abeyance and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning of the district court.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-04-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-7813

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Gregory Allen Milton's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, denial of his motion for reconsideration, and denial of his motion for a certificate of appealability. The Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's rulings. The Fourth Circuit also denied Milton's motion to place his appeal in abeyance and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning of the district court.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Milton, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Gregory Allen Milton's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, denial of his motion for reconsideration, and denial of his motion for a certificate of appealability. The Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's rulings. The Fourth Circuit also denied Milton's motion to place his appeal in abeyance and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning of the district 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 01-7813

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    GREGORY ALLEN MILTON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District
    Judge. (CR-95-74, CA-00-31-7)

    Submitted:

    February 22, 2002

    Decided:

    April 12, 2002

    Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Gregory Allen Milton, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Jack Bondurant,
    Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Gregory Allen Milton seeks to appeal the district courts
    orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West
    Supp. 2001), denying a subsequent motion for reconsideration, and
    denying his motion for a certificate of appealability.*

    We have

    reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and find no
    reversible error.

    Accordingly, we deny Miltons motion to place

    his appeal in abeyance, deny a certificate of appealability, and


    dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

    See

    United States v. Milton, Nos. CA-95-74; CA-00-31-7 (W.D. Va.


    Aug. 1, 2001; Aug. 30, 2001).

    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

    Milton appeals the denial of his motion for a certificate of


    appealability by a magistrate judge, correctly noting that the
    magistrate judge was without authority to enter a final order
    disposing of his motion. See 28 U.S.C.A. 636 (West 1993 & Supp.
    2001). While the magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction to enter a
    final order on this post-judgment motion, we find relief is not
    warranted, as we have considered Miltons motion for a certificate
    of appealability and determined it to be without merit. See Fed.
    R. App. P. 22(b)(2).
    2

    You might also like