Matthew Emiohe v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Fourth Circuit

Matthew Emiohe v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service

57 F.3d 1065, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 21804, 1995 WL 365685

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 19, 1995

Docket94-2476

StatusPublished

This text of 57 F.3d 1065 (Matthew Emiohe v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Matthew Emiohe v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 57 F.3d 1065, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 21804, 1995 WL 365685 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

57 F.3d 1065
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Matthew EMIOHE, Petitioner,
v.
U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

No. 94-2476.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 31, 1995.
Decided: June 19, 1995.

Matthew Emiohe, Petitioner Pro Se.

Richard Michael Evans, Robert Leigh Bombaugh, Anthony Wray Norwood, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before WIDENER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (Board) decision and order dismissing Petitioner's appeal from the immigration judge's deportation order. Our review of the record discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Emiohe v. INS, No. Alv-nha-mmu (B.I.A. July 27, 1994). Because this appeal presents no complex issues, Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel is denied. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

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

57 F.3d 1065
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Matthew EMIOHE, Petitioner,
v.
U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

No. 94-2476.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 31, 1995.
Decided: June 19, 1995.

Matthew Emiohe, Petitioner Pro Se.

Richard Michael Evans, Robert Leigh Bombaugh, Anthony Wray Norwood, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before WIDENER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (Board) decision and order dismissing Petitioner's appeal from the immigration judge's deportation order. Our review of the record discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Emiohe v. INS, No. Alv-nha-mmu (B.I.A. July 27, 1994). Because this appeal presents no complex issues, Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel is denied. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 F.3d 1065, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 21804, 1995 WL 365685, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matthew-emiohe-v-us-immigration-naturalization-ser-ca4-1995.