Scribd Logo
Importer

Bienvenue sur Scribd !

  • United States v. Blackwell, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Transféré par

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 vues2 pages
    Cornell Blackwell 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 affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the lower court's decision to deny Blackwell's § 2255 motion based on the reasoning in the district court's opinion.

    Description originale:

    Filed: 1996-12-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-6565

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Formats disponibles

    PDF ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd

    Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

    Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

    Signaler ce document
    Cornell Blackwell 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 affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the lower court's decision to deny Blackwell's § 2255 motion based on the reasoning in the district court's opinion.

    Droits d'auteur :

    Public Domain
    Téléchargez comme PDF ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    2 vues2 pages

    United States v. Blackwell, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Transféré par

    Scribd Government Docs
    Cornell Blackwell 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 affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the lower court's decision to deny Blackwell's § 2255 motion based on the reasoning in the district court's opinion.

    Droits d'auteur :

    Public Domain
    Téléchargez comme PDF ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    sur 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 96-6565

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CORNELL BLACKWELL,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior
    District Judge. (CR-92-62-P, CA-96-68-3-P)
    Submitted:

    November 26, 1996

    Decided:

    December 17, 1996

    Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Cornell Blackwell, Appellant Pro Se.
    James Michael Sullivan,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism
    and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110
    Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the district court's
    opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the
    reasoning of the district court. United States v. Blackwell, Nos.
    CR-92-62-P; CA-96-68-3-P (W.D.N.C. Mar. 7, 1996). 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

    Vous aimerez peut-être aussi