United States v. Avery

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 22, 1998
Docket97-6982
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Avery (United States v. Avery) 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
United States v. Avery, (4th Cir. 1998).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6982

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

FREDERICK ERNEST AVERY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CR-92-20-F, CA-97-269-5-F)

Submitted: January 6, 1998 Decided: January 22, 1998

Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Frederick Ernest Avery, Appellant Pro Se. John Samuel Bowler, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. We find Appellant's claims of ineffective

assistance of trial and appellate counsel to be without merit be- cause Appellant failed to establish prejudice. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 694 (1984). Accordingly, we deny Appel-

lant's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v.

Avery, Nos. CR-92-20-F; CA-97-269-5-F (E.D.N.C. June 3, 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

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

Related

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Avery, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-avery-ca4-1998.