United States v. Bridges

570 F. App'x 319
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 2, 2014
DocketNo. 13-7771
StatusPublished

This text of 570 F. App'x 319 (United States v. Bridges) 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. Bridges, 570 F. App'x 319 (4th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Aroz Kenyon Bridges appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as untimely. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record and conclude that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider what is Bridges’ second § 2255 motion absent pre-filing authorization from this court. Unit[320]*320ed States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d 200, 205 (4th Cir.2003). Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of the motion on that ground. See United States v. Smith, 395 F.3d 516, 519 (4th Cir.2005). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court 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

Related

United States v. Paul Winestock, Jr.
340 F.3d 200 (Fourth Circuit, 2003)
United States v. Terrence Ormstom Smith
395 F.3d 516 (Fourth Circuit, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
570 F. App'x 319, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-bridges-ca4-2014.