United States v. Dickerson
This text of United States v. Dickerson (United States v. Dickerson) 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UNPUBLISHED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. 95-6985
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DARREN ANDREW DICKERSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CR-92-163, CA-95-118-2)
Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 4, 1996
Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Darren Andrew Dickerson, Appellant Pro Se. Rebecca A. Betts, United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his
28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the
district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magis-
trate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on
the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Dickerson, Nos. CR-92-163; CA-95-118-2 (S.D.W. Va. May 26, 1995). 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.
AFFIRMED
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. Dickerson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-dickerson-ca4-1996.