Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    1) James M. Debardeleben appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. 3) The Fourth Circuit denied Debardeleben's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning provided by the district court in its denial of Debardeleben's § 2255 motion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-09-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-6751

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) James M. Debardeleben appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. 3) The Fourth Circuit denied Debardeleben's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning provided by the district court in its denial of Debardeleben's § 2255 motion.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) James M. Debardeleben appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. 3) The Fourth Circuit denied Debardeleben's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the reasoning provided by the district court in its denial of Debardeleben's § 2255 motion.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 01-6751

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    JAMES M. DEBARDELEBEN,
    Defendant -Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees,
    District Judge. (CR-83-50, CA-01-30-3-2-V)

    Submitted:

    September 20, 2001

    Decided:

    September 26, 2001

    Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    James M. Debardeleben, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Lee Whisler, OFFICE
    OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    James M. Debardeleben seeks to appeal the district courts
    orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West
    Supp. 2001) and denying his motion for reconsideration.

    We have

    reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and find no
    reversible error.

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeal-

    ability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district


    court. See United States v. Debardeleben, Nos. CR-83-50; CA-01-303-2-V (W.D.N.C. Jan. 29, 2001; filed Feb. 28, 2001; entered Mar. 1,
    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