United States v. Smith
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6339
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RUDI BERNARD SMITH,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CR-88-200, CA-96-887-2)
Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 16, 1998
Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rudi Bernard Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Michelle Lecocq, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying his
motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 to reconsider the denial of
his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998) motion. We have
reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no
reversible error. The district court dismissed the case after Ap-
pellant failed to file objections to the magistrate judge’s report
and recommendation. We note that Appellant’s Rule 59 motion could
not be construed as objections to the magistrate judge’s report
because they were not filed within the time period set for filing
such objections. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealabil-
ity and dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. United
States v. Smith, Nos. CR-88-200; CA-96-887-2 (S.D.W. Va., Feb. 4 &
27, 1997). 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. Smith (United States v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.