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)
01-6088•United States of America v. Tom Aaron Tate
01-6088Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 25, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-6088
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
TOM AARON TATE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief
District Judge. (CR-94-147, CA-99-384-3-MU)
Submitted: May 17, 2001 Decided: May 25, 2001
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tom Aaron Tate, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Lee Whisler, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Tom Aaron Tate appeals 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 opinion and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. United States v. Tate, Nos. CR-94-147; CA-99-384-
3-MU (W.D.N.C. Feb. 12, 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.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.