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)
02-6096•United States of America v. Bekir Vural
02-6096Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 29, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6096
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
BEKIR VURAL,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief
District Judge. (CR-90-139-A, CA-99-1576-AM)
Submitted: March 21, 2002 Decided: March 29, 2002
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bekir Vural, Appellant Pro Se. Epin Hu Christensen, Special
Assistant United States Attorney, Paul J. McNulty, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Bekir Vural 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 opinion and find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the
district court. See United States v. Vural, Nos. CR-90-139-A; CA-
99-1576-AM (E.D. Va. Dec. 10, 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.