United States v. Bridges

570 F. App'x 319
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 2, 2014·No. No. 13-7771·Published

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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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] ed 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

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

570 F. App'x 319 (United States v. Bridges) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)