Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Como, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    Andrew Como 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 Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The Fourth Circuit denied Como a certificate of appealability, denied his motion for judgment on the pleadings, and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as set forth in its opinion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-08-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 98-6539

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Andrew Como 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 Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The Fourth Circuit denied Como a certificate of appealability, denied his motion for judgment on the pleadings, and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as set forth in its opinion.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Como, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Andrew Como 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 Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The Fourth Circuit denied Como a certificate of appealability, denied his motion for judgment on the pleadings, and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as set forth in its opinion.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 98-6539

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    ANDREW COMO,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
    Judge. (CR-95-495, CA-97-3477-7-20)

    Submitted:

    July 30, 1998

    Decided:

    August 26, 1998

    Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Andrew Como, Appellant Pro Se. Harold Watson Gowdy, III, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Andrew Como seeks to appeal the district courts order denying
    his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).
    We have reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and
    find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Comos motion for judgment on the pleadings, and
    dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United
    States v. Como, Nos. CR-95-495; CA-97-3477-7-20 (D.S.C. Mar. 4,
    1998). 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