United States v. Roach

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Roach. Read the opinion of the Court — 5 F. App'x 255
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 9, 1999·No. 98-7153·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7153

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LOVANSA YOLANDA ROACH, a/k/a Blondie,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-90-196, CA-97-594-2)

Submitted: January 21, 1999 Decided: February 9, 1999

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lovansa Yolanda Roach, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Francis Joseph, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Lovansa Yolanda Roach seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying her motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994

& Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate

judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a cer-

tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. See United States v. Roach, Nos. CR-90-196;

CA-97-594-2 (M.D.N.C. July 13, 1998). We dispense with oral argu-

ment 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. Roach, (4th Cir. 1999).

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

Related