The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
00-6755•United States of America v. William David Tucker
00-6755Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 7, 2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6755
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff- Appellee,
versus
WILLIAM DAVID TUCKER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.
(CR-97-110, CA-99-395-7)
Submitted: July 27, 2000 Decided: August 7, 2000
Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William David Tucker, Appellant Pro Se. Sharon Burnham, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
William David Tucker seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.
2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin-
ion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certifi-
cate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of
the district court. See United States v. Tucker, Nos. CR-97-110;
CA-99-395-7 (W.D. Va. Apr. 5, 2000). 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.