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)
05-6662•United States of America v. Cleveland
05-6662Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit18.10.2005
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6662
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
TROY V. CLEVELAND,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District
Judge. (CR-93-402; CA-99-1030)
Submitted: September 30, 2005 Decided: October 18, 2005
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Troy V. Cleveland, Appellant Pro Se. James L. Trump, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
* The motion was styled “‘Ends of Justice’ Motion Pursuant to
the All Writs Act Under 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a)” and “request[ed]
reconsideration” of the denial of a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion.
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Troy V. Cleveland appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his motion construed as a request for
reconsideration pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). * We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United
States v. Cleveland, Nos. CR-93-402; CA-99-1030 (E.D. Va. Apr. 7,
2005). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.