United States v. Allen
This text of United States v. Allen (United States v. Allen) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6557
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
TROY J. ALLEN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CR-95-145-WMN, CA-96-2676-WMN)
Submitted: February 26, 1998 Decided: March 16, 1998
Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Troy J. Allen, Appellant Pro Se. Bonnie S. Greenberg, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 Appellant's motion
for stay pending appeal, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Allen, Nos. CR-95-145-WMN; CA-96-2676-WMN (D. Md. Feb. 5,
1997, and Apr. 9, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-
rials 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Allen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-allen-ca4-1998.