Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Clyde E. Fockler, Jr. appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied Fockler's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Fockler was not entitled to relief under Section 2255.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-08-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-6788

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Clyde E. Fockler, Jr. appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied Fockler's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Fockler was not entitled to relief under Section 2255.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Clyde E. Fockler, Jr. appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied Fockler's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Fockler was not entitled to relief under Section 2255.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 02-6788

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CLYDE E. FOCKLER, JR.,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
    District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II,
    Chief District Judge. (CR-00-48-2, CA-01-547-2)

    Submitted:

    July 25, 2002

    Decided:

    August 2, 2002

    Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Clyde E. Fockler, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE
    OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Clyde E. Fockler, Jr., seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp.
    2002).

    We have reviewed the record and the district courts

    opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and


    find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

    appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the


    district court. See United States v. Fockler, Nos. CR-00-48-2; CA01-547-2 (S.D.W. Va. Apr. 8, 2002). 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