Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 views

    United States v. Hutson, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Charles Hutson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for relief filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling. As such, the Fourth Circuit denied Hutson a certificate of appealability and dismissed the case based on the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit also denied Hutson's motion to remand the case.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    United States v. Hutson, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    Charles Hutson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for relief filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling. As such, the Fourth Circuit denied Hutson a certificate of appealability and dismissed the case based on the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit also denied Hutson's motion to remand the case.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-10-15 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-7206

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Charles Hutson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for relief filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling. As such, the Fourth Circuit denied Hutson a certificate of appealability and dismissed the case based on the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit also denied Hutson's motion to remand the case.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Hutson, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Charles Hutson appealed the district court's denial of his motion for relief filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling. As such, the Fourth Circuit denied Hutson a certificate of appealability and dismissed the case based on the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit also denied Hutson's motion to remand the case.

    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. 96-7206

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CHARLES HUTSON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District
    Judge. (CR-94-130-F, CA-96-274-F)
    Submitted:

    September 30, 1996

    Decided:

    October 15, 1996

    Before HALL, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.


    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Charles Hutson, Appellant Pro Se. John Eric Evenson, II, 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:
    Charles Hutson appeals from the district court's order denying
    his motion for relief filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 (1994),
    amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996,
    Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214.

    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 on
    the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Hutson, Nos.
    CR-94-130-F; CA-96-274-F (E.D.N.C. July 15, 1996).

    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. Appellant`s motion for remand
    is denied.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like