Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Morris, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Michael Lorenzo Morris appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error. It therefore denied Morris a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning. The Court of Appeals dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-08-30 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-6718

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Michael Lorenzo Morris appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error. It therefore denied Morris a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning. The Court of Appeals dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    0 views2 pages

    United States v. Morris, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Michael Lorenzo Morris appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error. It therefore denied Morris a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning. The Court of Appeals dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 01-6718

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    MICHAEL LORENZO MORRIS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.
    (CR-94-46, CA-99-772-7)

    Submitted:

    August 23, 2001

    Decided:

    August 30, 2001

    Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Andrew Michael Sacks, SACKS & SACKS, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant. Julie C. Dudley, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke,
    Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Michael Lorenzo Morris seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp.
    2000).

    We have reviewed the record and the district courts opin-

    ion and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we deny a certif-

    icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of


    the district court. United States v. Morris, Nos. CR-94-46; CA-99772-7 (W.D. Va. Feb. 28, 2001).

    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

    You might also like