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)
01-7183•United States of America v. Ronald Lee Jones
01-7183Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitDec 6, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7183
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RONALD LEE JONES,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District
Judge. (CR-97-51, CA-00-801-7)
Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 6, 2001
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald Lee Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph William Hooge Mott,
Assistant 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Ronald Lee Jones appeals the district court’s order denying
his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001). We
have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeal-
ability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district
court. See United States v. Jones, Nos. CR-97-51; CA-00-801-7
(W.D. Va. May 15, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-
terials 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.