United States v. Lawrence
This text of United States v. Lawrence (United States v. Lawrence) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7223
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MAYSO LAWRENCE, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Herbert N. Maletz, Senior Judge, sitting by designation. (CR-89-391-JFM, CA-96-1336-HNM)
Submitted: July 15, 1997 Decided: July 30, 1997
Before HALL and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mayso Lawrence, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Vincent Geise, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his
motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994) (current version at 28
U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). 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. Lawrence, Nos. CR-89-391-JFM; CA-96-1336- HNM (D. Md. June 28, 1996). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL 338568 (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Lawrence, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-lawrence-ca4-1997.