United States v. Edward Lee Dunn, A/K/A Ed, A/K/A Eddie, A/K/A Fat Boy

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Edward Lee Dunn, A/K/A Ed, A/K/A Eddie, A/K/A Fat Boy

59 F.3d 168, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23185, 1995 WL 375946

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 26, 1995·No. 95-6311·Published

Opinion

59 F.3d 168
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff--Appellee,
v.
Edward Lee DUNN, a/k/a Ed, a/k/a Eddie, a/k/a Fat Boy,
Defendant--Appellant.

No. 95-6311.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 18, 1995.
Decided June 26, 1995.

Edward Lee Dunn, Appellant Pro Se. Jane H. Jolly, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, NC.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his motion for reconsideration of the order denying his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Dunn, Nos. CR-91-97 & CA-94-151 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 14, 1994). 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

59 F.3d 168
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff--Appellee,
v.
Edward Lee DUNN, a/k/a Ed, a/k/a Eddie, a/k/a Fat Boy,
Defendant--Appellant.

No. 95-6311.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 18, 1995.
Decided June 26, 1995.

Edward Lee Dunn, Appellant Pro Se. Jane H. Jolly, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, NC.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his motion for reconsideration of the order denying his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Dunn, Nos. CR-91-97 & CA-94-151 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 14, 1994). 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.

United States v. Edward Lee Dunn, A/K/A Ed, A/K/A Eddie, A/K/A Fat Boy, 59 F.3d 168, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23185, 1995 WL 375946 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

59 F.3d 168 (United States v. Edward Lee Dunn, A/K/A Ed, A/K/A Eddie, A/K/A Fat Boy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.