Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Maurice David King's appeal of a district court's partial denial and partial granting of his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-05-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-7347

    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 dismissed Maurice David King's appeal of a district court's partial denial and partial granting of his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Maurice David King's appeal of a district court's partial denial and partial granting of his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 97-7347

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    MAURICE DAVID KING, a/k/a Peanut,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore.
    Alexander Harvey II, Senior District
    Judge. (CR-82-401-H, CA-97-914-H)
    Submitted:

    May 14, 1998

    Decided:

    May 26, 1998

    Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Fred Warren Bennett, BENNETT & NATHANS, L.L.P., Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Katherine Jacobs Armentrout, Assistant United
    States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying,
    in part, and granting, in part, 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. King,
    Nos. CR-82-401-H; CA-97-914-H (D. Md. 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