Johnson v. United States

Fourth Circuit

Johnson v. United States

18 F. App'x 81

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Johnson v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 50 F. App'x 113 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 5, 2001·No. 01-7040·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Matthew Johnson appeals the district court’s orders denying his motions filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001), and Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Johnson v. United States, Nos. CR-98-76; CA-01-17-4 (E.D. Va. Mar. 19 & Apr. 20, 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Matthew Johnson appeals the district court’s orders denying his motions filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001), and Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Johnson v. United States, Nos. CR-98-76; CA-01-17-4 (E.D. Va. Mar. 19 & Apr. 20, 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.

Johnson v. United States, 18 F. App'x 81 (4th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

18 F. App'x 81 (Johnson v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related