United States v. Pendergrass

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6500

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

WAYTIS PENDERGRASS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CR-92-216, CA-01-2738-4-22)

Submitted: May 16, 2002 Decided: May 28, 2002

Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Waytis Pendergrass, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Gordon Baker, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Waytis Pendergrass seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion to reconsider the denial of relief under 28

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001). 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 on the reasoning of the district court. See United States

v. Pendergrass, Nos. CR-92-216; CA-01-2738-4-22 (D.S.C. filed Dec.

5, 2001; entered Dec. 6, 2001). 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