Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Thomas, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Dion Thomas's motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In a per curiam unpublished opinion, the panel reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court affirmed the district court's reasoning and decision to deny Thomas's motion for post-conviction relief. The panel dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-03-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6553

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Dion Thomas's motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In a per curiam unpublished opinion, the panel reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court affirmed the district court's reasoning and decision to deny Thomas's motion for post-conviction relief. The panel dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the court materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Thomas, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Dion Thomas's motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In a per curiam unpublished opinion, the panel reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court affirmed the district court's reasoning and decision to deny Thomas's motion for post-conviction relief. The panel dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the court materials.

    Copyright:

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

    ON REHEARING

    UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 05-6553

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    DION THOMAS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    James C. Fox, Senior
    District Judge. (CR-00-176-F; CA-04-864-F)

    Submitted:

    February 24, 2006

    Decided:

    March 14, 2006

    Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Dion Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas B. Murphy, Assistant United


    States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Dion Thomas appeals the district courts order denying
    relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000).
    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
    affirm

    on

    the

    reasoning

    of

    the

    district

    We have

    Accordingly, we

    court.

    See

    United

    States v. Thomas, No. CA-04-864-F (E.D.N.C. Dec. 27, 2004).

    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.

    AFFIRMED

    - 2 -

    You might also like