Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Marvin Thomas, A/K/A Marvin Haskins, 19 F.3d 1431, 4th Cir. (1994)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on February 25, 1994. The appellant, Marvin Thomas, appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. Additionally, the Fourth Circuit found that Thomas waived his right to appeal or collaterally attack the calculation of his sentence by failing to object at his original sentencing. Even if Thomas had claimed ineffective assistance of counsel, he failed to demonstrate that the calculation of his sentence under the sentencing guidelines was incorrect.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1994-02-25 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 19 F.3d 1431 Docket: 93-7259

    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 court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on February 25, 1994. The appellant, Marvin Thomas, appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. Additionally, the Fourth Circuit found that Thomas waived his right to appeal or collaterally attack the calculation of his sentence by failing to object at his original sentencing. Even if Thomas had claimed ineffective assistance of counsel, he failed to demonstrate that the calculation of his sentence under the sentencing guidelines was incorrect.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Marvin Thomas, A/K/A Marvin Haskins, 19 F.3d 1431, 4th Cir. (1994)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on February 25, 1994. The appellant, Marvin Thomas, appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. Additionally, the Fourth Circuit found that Thomas waived his right to appeal or collaterally attack the calculation of his sentence by failing to object at his original sentencing. Even if Thomas had claimed ineffective assistance of counsel, he failed to demonstrate that the calculation of his sentence under the sentencing guidelines was incorrect.

    Copyright:

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

    19 F.

    3d 1431

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    Marvin THOMAS, a/k/a Marvin Haskins, Defendant
    Appellant.
    No. 93-7259.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: January 20, 1994.
    Decided: February 25, 1994.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,
    at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CR-91-198-S, CA-933701-S)
    Marvin Thomas, Appellant Pro Se.
    John Vincent Geise, Office of the United States Attorney, Baltimore,
    Maryland, for Appellee.
    D.Md.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. Sec.
    2255 (1988) motion. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion
    discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm substantially

    on the reasoning of the district court.* United States v. Thomas, Nos. CR-91198-S; CA-93-3701-S (D. Md. Nov. 10, 1993). 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

    We find that Appellant's failure to object at sentencing to the calculation of his


    sentence constitutes waiver on appeal or collateral attack. See United States v.
    Davis, 954 F.2d 182, 187 (4th Cir.1992). Furthermore, even if Appellant had
    claimed ineffective assistance of counsel as cause for his failure to object, he
    has failed to demonstrate prejudice because the evidence supports the
    calculation of Appellant's sentence under the applicable sentencing guidelines.
    See United States v. Frady, 456 U.S. 152, 167-68 (1982)

    You might also like