United States v. Sistrunk

Opinion

F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 24 1997 TENTH CIRCUIT PATRICK FISHER Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 96-3418 v. (D.C. No. 96-3420-EEO) (District of Kansas) LEWIS L. SISTRUNK,

Defendant-Appellant.

ORDER

Before SEYMOUR, Chief Judge, PORFILIO, Circuit Judge, and MURPHY, Circuit Judge.

Contending he was denied effective assistance of counsel, Lewis Sistrunk attempts

to appeal the denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The case is pending before us

upon an application for a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). After

review of his briefs and the record, we conclude, substantially for the reasons set forth by

the district court in denying the relief requested, Mr. Sistrunk has failed to raise issues

that are debatable among jurists, or that a court could resolve the issues differently, or that

the questions deserve further proceedings. The certificate of appealability is DENIED and the appeal is DISMISSED. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Lennox v. Evans, 87 F.3d 431

(10th Cir. 1996). The mandate shall issue forthwith.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

John C. Porfilio Circuit Judge

-2-