United States v. William Harris
This text of United States v. William Harris (United States v. William Harris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 19-6915 Doc: 24 Filed: 08/24/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6915
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
WILLIAM FELTON HARRIS, a/k/a Hulk Harris,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (7:16-cr-00127-BO-1; 7:18-cv-00216- BO)
Submitted: August 10, 2023 Decided: August 24, 2023
Before AGEE and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Felton Harris, Appellant Pro Se. Kristine L. Fritz, Assistant United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Katharine Paige O’Hale, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 19-6915 Doc: 24 Filed: 08/24/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
William Felton Harris appeals from the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 motion. We previously granted a certificate of appealability on the following claim:
whether Harris’s guilty plea should be vacated in light of Rehaif v. United States, 139 S.
Ct. 2191 (2019). Rehaif was decided after the district court’s order, and thus, this claim
was raised for the first time on appeal. A certificate of appealability was denied as to all
other claims. We now dismiss Harris’s appeal.
Absent exceptional circumstances, we do not consider issues raised for the first time
on appeal. Pornomo v. United States, 814 F.3d 681, 686 (4th Cir. 2016). Harris’s Rehaif
claim was presented in a conclusory manner with no supporting facts. In addition, he has
not attempted to show exceptional circumstances. Given his barebones claim and his
failure to provide this court with any further information or argument, we decline to
consider this claim for the first time on appeal.
Accordingly, we dismiss Harris’s appeal. 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.
DISMISSED
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. William Harris, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-william-harris-ca4-2023.