Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
02-6587•United States of America v. James Paige, a/k/a Ness
02-6587Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit20.08.2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6587
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JAMES PAIGE, a/k/a Ness,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District
Judge. (CR-90-236, CA-01-1255-A)
Submitted: August 15, 2002 Decided: August 20, 2002
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Paige, Appellant Pro Se. Michael R. Smythers, Assistant
United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
James Paige seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying
his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). 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. See
United States v. Paige, Nos. CR-90-236; CA-01-1255-A (E.D. Va. Feb.
11, 2002). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.