United States v. Prysock

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Prysock

613 F. App'x 239

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 24, 2015·No. No. 14-7374·Published

Opinion

[240] Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jeffrey Grant Prysock appeals the district court’s order construing his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and dismissing it for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Prysock, Nos. 7:11-cr-00171-HMH-1; 7:14-cv-02908-HMH (D.S.C. filed July 21, 2014; entered July 22, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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

[240] Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jeffrey Grant Prysock appeals the district court’s order construing his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and dismissing it for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Prysock, Nos. 7:11-cr-00171-HMH-1; 7:14-cv-02908-HMH (D.S.C. filed July 21, 2014; entered July 22, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

United States v. Prysock, 613 F. App'x 239 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

613 F. App'x 239 (United States v. Prysock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related