United States v. Dawkins
This text of United States v. Dawkins (United States v. Dawkins) 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UNPUBLISHED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. 02-6888
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JAMES EDWARD DAWKINS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (CR-95-9)
Submitted: September 5, 2002 Decided: September 10, 2002
Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Edward Dawkins, Appellant Pro Se. Jack M. Knight, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
James Edward Dawkins seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying his motions correctly construed as requesting relief
under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We have reviewed the record and the
district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on
the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Dawkins,
No. CR-95-9 (W.D.N.C. May 24, 2002). Dawkins’ motion for the
appointment of counsel is denied. We deny leave to proceed on
appeal in forma pauperis. 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Dawkins, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-dawkins-ca4-2002.