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)
01-6879•United States of America v. Quinton D. Rainey, a/k/a Q
01-6879Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 25, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-6879
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
QUINTON D. RAINEY, a/k/a Q,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca B. Smith, District
Judge. (CR-94-69)
Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 25, 2001
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Quinton D. Rainey, Appellant Pro Se. Fernando Groene, OFFICE OF
THE 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Quinton Rainey appeals from the district court’s orders de-
nying his motions to reconsider the denial of relief on his 28
U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001) motion. Our review of the record
and the district court’s opinions disclose no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.
United States v. Rainey, No. CR-94-69 (E.D. Va. Apr. 19, 2001;
May 11, 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.