United States v. Jones

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Jones. Read the opinion of the Court — 18 F.3d 1145
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 18, 1996·No. 95-7351·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7351

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RANDY JONES, a/k/a Freeze,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CR-93-14-BR, CA-95-152-5-CV-BR)

Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: June 18, 1996

Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Randy Jones, Appellant Pro Se. John Eric Evenson, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss on the reasoning

of the district court. United States v. Jones, Nos. CR-93-14-BR; CA-95-152-5-CV-BR (E.D.N.C. July 28, 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.

DISMISSED

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Jones, (4th Cir. 1996).

United States v. Jones (United States v. Jones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related