Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    Quinton Leon Sutton 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 acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit denied Sutton's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as explained in United States v. Sutton, Nos. CR-98-355; CA-01-369-1 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 20, 2001). The Fourth Circuit determined that oral argument was not necessary because the relevant facts and legal issues were

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-06-06 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-6161

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Quinton Leon Sutton 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 acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit denied Sutton's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as explained in United States v. Sutton, Nos. CR-98-355; CA-01-369-1 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 20, 2001). The Fourth Circuit determined that oral argument was not necessary because the relevant facts and legal issues were

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Quinton Leon Sutton 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 acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit denied Sutton's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning as explained in United States v. Sutton, Nos. CR-98-355; CA-01-369-1 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 20, 2001). The Fourth Circuit determined that oral argument was not necessary because the relevant facts and legal issues were

    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. 02-6161

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    QUINTON LEON SUTTON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham.
    Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,
    District Judge. (CR-98-355, CA-01-369-1)

    Submitted:

    May 30, 2002

    Decided:

    June 6, 2002

    Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Charles Linwood Morgan, Jr., Charlotte, North Carolina; Marcia Gail
    Shein, LAW OFFICE OF MARCIA G. SHEIN, P.C., Decatur, Georgia, for
    Appellant. Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant United States Attorney,
    Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Quinton Leon Sutton seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp.
    2001). We have reviewed the record and the district courts opinion
    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no
    reversible error.
    certificate

    of

    Accordingly, we deny Suttons motion for a

    appealability

    and

    dismiss

    the

    appeal

    on

    the

    reasoning of the district court. United States v. Sutton, Nos. CR98-355; CA-01-369-1 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 20, 2001). 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