United States v. Edge

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedApril 26, 2002
Docket01-7628
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Edge (United States v. Edge) 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. Edge, (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7628

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

TONY EDGE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CR-96-392, CA-99-2658-4-22)

Submitted: February 5, 2002 Decided: April 26, 2002

Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tony Edge, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Tony Edge seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

his motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order

denying his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) motion. Edge

claims that his sentence was improperly enhanced by a state

conviction obtained in violation of his right to counsel and that

his attorney was ineffective for failing to object to the

enhancement on this ground. However, Edge bears the burden of

showing that his prior conviction was invalid. See United States v.

Jones, 977 F.2d 105, 110 (4th Cir. 1992). Because Edge has failed

to submit any evidence supporting his claim that he did not

properly waive counsel during the state proceeding, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We grant

Edge’s motion to file a pro se supplemental brief and 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

United States v. Robert William Jones
977 F.2d 105 (Fourth Circuit, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Edge, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-edge-ca4-2002.