United States v. Sistrunk
This text of United States v. Sistrunk (United States v. Sistrunk) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
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-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Sistrunk, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-sistrunk-ca10-1997.