United States v. Porter

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Porter. Read the opinion of the Court — 49 F. App'x 438
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 28, 2000·No. 00-6661·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6661

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LORENZA PORTER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CR-95-80, CA-98-234-3)

Submitted: September 21, 2000 Decided: September 28, 2000

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lorenza Porter, Appellant Pro Se. David T. Maguire, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Lorenza Porter seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion for reconsideration of the denial of his 28

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000) 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 the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See

United States v. Porter, Nos. CR-95-80; CA-98-234-3 (E.D. Va. Apr.

28, 2000). 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. Porter, (4th Cir. 2000).

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

Related