Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 views

    Ramey v. United States, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Anthony Dewayne Ramey filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking to appeal the district court's denial of his motion. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error. 3) The Fourth Circuit denied Ramey's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for denying Ramey's motion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Ramey v. United States, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    1) Anthony Dewayne Ramey filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking to appeal the district court's denial of his motion. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error. 3) The Fourth Circuit denied Ramey's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for denying Ramey's motion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-05-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-6204

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Anthony Dewayne Ramey filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking to appeal the district court's denial of his motion. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error. 3) The Fourth Circuit denied Ramey's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for denying Ramey's motion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    1 views2 pages

    Ramey v. United States, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Anthony Dewayne Ramey filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking to appeal the district court's denial of his motion. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error. 3) The Fourth Circuit denied Ramey's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for denying Ramey's motion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 97-6204

    ANTHONY DEWAYNE RAMEY,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.
    (CR-91-14-R, CA-96-624-R)
    Submitted:

    April 17, 1997

    Decided:

    May 2, 1997

    Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Anthony Dewayne Ramey, Appellant Pro Se. Julie C. Dudley, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Stephen Urban Baer, 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:
    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. Ramey v. United States, Nos. CR-91-14-R; CA-96-624-R (W.D.
    Va. Jan. 28, 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