United States v. Dyches

614 F. App'x 671
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Dyches. Read the opinion of the Court — 604 F. App'x 329
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 27, 2015·No. No. 15-6517·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lennell Dyches appeals the district court’s order denying his self-styled “Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 60(b)(6) Motion for Reconsideration of Sentence” as a successive and unauthorized 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion, and denying his motions for transcripts at government expense, to review the original “wet-ink” signature on his plea agreement, and for an evidentiary hearing. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Dyches, No. 8:06-cr-00136-JFA-1 (D.S.C. Apr. 2, 2015). 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. Dyches, 614 F. App'x 671 (4th Cir. 2015).

614 F. App'x 671 (United States v. Dyches) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related