Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views2 pages
    Jing Ping Li appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling. The appeals court denied Li a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as explained in its July 29, 1997 opinion. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the relevant facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-07-09 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-7166

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Jing Ping Li appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling. The appeals court denied Li a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as explained in its July 29, 1997 opinion. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the relevant 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
    9 views2 pages

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Jing Ping Li appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's ruling. The appeals court denied Li a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as explained in its July 29, 1997 opinion. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the relevant 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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 97-7166

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    JING PING LI,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge.
    (CR-92-188-2, CA-96-1208-2)

    Submitted:

    January 30, 1998

    Decided:

    July 9, 1998

    Before WIDENER and ERVIN, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Andrew Robert Sebok, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant. James Ashford Metcalfe, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia,
    for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Jing Ping Li seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.
    1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion
    and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
    appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the
    district court. United States v. Li, Nos. CR-92-188-2; CA-96-1208-2
    (E.D. Va. July 29, 1997). 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