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)
01-7252•United States of America v. Airrion Curtis Agee
01-7252Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJan 14, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7252
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
AIRRION CURTIS AGEE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.
(CR-97-287)
Submitted: December 27, 2001 Decided: January 14, 2002
Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Airrion Curtis Agee, Appellant Pro Se. James Brien Comey, Jr.,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Airrion Curtis Agee seeks to appeal 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 opin-
ion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge 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. Agee, No. CR-97-287 (E.D. Va. July 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.
DISMISSED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.