Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a 3-judge panel's unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Paul James's appeal of a district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The panel reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error in the reasoning for denying James's motion. The panel therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the district court's reasoning.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    This document is a 3-judge panel's unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Paul James's appeal of a district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The panel reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error in the reasoning for denying James's motion. The panel therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the district court's reasoning.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-09-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-6606

    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    This document is a 3-judge panel's unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Paul James's appeal of a district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The panel reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error in the reasoning for denying James's motion. The panel therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the district court's reasoning.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a 3-judge panel's unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Paul James's appeal of a district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The panel reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error in the reasoning for denying James's motion. The panel therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the district court's reasoning.

    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. 01-6606

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    PAUL JAMES,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District
    Judge. (CR-97-70095, CA-99-808-7)

    Submitted:

    August 24, 2001

    Decided:

    September 10, 2001

    Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Paul James, Appellant Pro Se. Anthony Paul Giorno, OFFICE OF THE
    UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Paul James seeks to appeal the district courts order denying
    his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp. 2001).

    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. United States v. James, Nos. CR-97-70095; CA-99-808-7 (W.D.
    Va. filed Feb. 28, 2001; entered Mar. 1, 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

    You might also like