Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Digsby, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    Lamont Digsby appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and agreed with the district court that Digsby did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, the Fourth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-10-31 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-7254

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Lamont Digsby appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and agreed with the district court that Digsby did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, the Fourth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Digsby, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Lamont Digsby appealed the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and agreed with the district court that Digsby did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, the Fourth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 02-7254

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    LAMONT DIGSBY,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief
    District Judge. (CR-00-88, CA-02-143-3-2-MU)

    Submitted:

    October 24, 2002

    Decided:

    October 31, 2002

    Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Lamont Digsby, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Lamont Digsby seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000).
    We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by
    the district court that Digsby has not made a substantial showing
    of the denial of a constitutional right.

    See United States v.

    Digsby, Nos. CR-00-88; CA-02-143-3-2-MU (W.D.N.C. July 31, 2002).


    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the
    appeal.

    See 28 U.S.C. 2253(c) (2000).

    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