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)
01-7349•United States of America v. Todd Andrew Herbert
01-7349Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 18, 2003
S. Ct. order filed 3/17/03;
case is vacated and remanded
-- 1 of 4 --
Petition for cert granted by
order filed 3/10/03; opinion
filed 12/18/01 is vacated
-- 2 of 4 --
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7349
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
TODD ANDREW HERBERT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Norman K. Moon, District Judge.
(CR-97-24, CV-00-170)
Submitted: December 5, 2001 Decided: December 18, 2001
Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Todd Andrew Herbert, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).
-- 3 of 4 --
4
PER CURIAM:
Todd Andrew Herbert 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 and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certif-
icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of
the district court. See United States v. Herbert, Nos. CR-97-24;
CV-00-170 (W.D. Va. May 30, 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
-- 4 of 4 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.