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)
01-6809•United States of America v. David J. Pingley
01-6809Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 20, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-6809
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DAVID J. PINGLEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, Senior
District Judge. (CR-94-39)
Submitted: July 12, 2001 Decided: July 20, 2001
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David J. Pingley, Appellant Pro Se. Sherry L. Muncy, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
David J. Pingley 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 certif-
icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the
reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Pingley, No.
CR-94-39 (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 9, 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.
DISMISSED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.