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)
02-7657•United States of America v. Arthur F. Jones, a/k/a Arthur Palmer, a/k/a Junior, a/k/a June
02-7657Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 3, 2003
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7657
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ARTHUR F. JONES, a/k/a Arthur Palmer, a/k/a
Junior, a/k/a June,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(CR-99-362, CA-01-4451-2)
Submitted: January 13, 2003 Decided: February 3, 2003
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Arthur F. Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Sean Kittrell, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Arthur F. Jones seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000).
We have reviewed the record and conclude that Jones has not made a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Accordingly, we deny
a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28
U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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.