United States v. Mills

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6643

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

MICHAEL EDWARD MILLS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CR-93-132, CA-96-877)

Submitted: January 27, 1998 Decided: February 10, 1998

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

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Edward Mills, Appellant Pro Se. N. George Metcalf, Assis- tant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

his motion filed under 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 deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Mills, Nos. CR-93-132; CA- 96-877 (E.D. Va. Apr. 16, 1997). We find Appellant's Fifth Amend-

ment, double jeopardy, and sentencing claims were waived because

Appellant failed to raise these issues on direct appeal, United States v. Emanuel, 869 F.2d 795, 796 (4th Cir. 1989), and failed to

demonstrate cause for and prejudice from his failure to raise the

issues earlier. See United States v. Frady, 456 U.S. 152, 167-68

(1982). 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