United States v. James Williams, A/K/A Jimbo

Fourth Circuit

United States v. James Williams, A/K/A Jimbo

38 F.3d 1214, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 36660, 1994 WL 560778

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 14, 1994

Docket93-6876

StatusPublished

This text of 38 F.3d 1214 (United States v. James Williams, A/K/A Jimbo) 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. James Williams, A/K/A Jimbo, 38 F.3d 1214, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 36660, 1994 WL 560778 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

38 F.3d 1214
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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.
James WILLIAMS, a/k/a Jimbo, Defendant Appellant.

No. 93-6876.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 19, 1993
Decided: October 14, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CR-90-72-K, CA-93-473-K)

James Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

Robert Reeves Harding, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 (1988) motion. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Williams, Nos. CR-90-72-K; CA-93-473-K (D. Md. July 15, 1993). 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

38 F.3d 1214
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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.
James WILLIAMS, a/k/a Jimbo, Defendant Appellant.

No. 93-6876.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 19, 1993
Decided: October 14, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CR-90-72-K, CA-93-473-K)

James Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

Robert Reeves Harding, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 (1988) motion. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Williams, Nos. CR-90-72-K; CA-93-473-K (D. Md. July 15, 1993). 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 F.3d 1214, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 36660, 1994 WL 560778, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-james-williams-aka-jimbo-ca4-1994.