United States v. Mack

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 17, 1996
Docket95-7188
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Mack (United States v. Mack) 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. Mack, (4th Cir. 1996).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7188

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

SHARON MACK,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CR-92-147, CA-95-1909-6-20)

Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 17, 1996

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sharon Mack, Appellant Pro Se. William Corley Lucius, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 her

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 leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny Appellant's mo-

tions for counsel and preparation of a transcript, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Mack, No. CR-92-147; CA-95-1909-6-20 (D.S.C. July 20, 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Mack, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mack-ca4-1996.