Case ID: f-appx_22/html/0189-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stephen James MILLS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 01-7595.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 8, 2001.
    Decided Nov. 21, 2001.
    Stephen James Mills, pro se.
    Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Stephen James Mills appeals from the district court’s order denying his Rule 60(b)(4) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Mills, No. CR-97-815 (D.S.C. filed Aug. 27, 2001; entered Aug. 28, 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.

AFFIRMED.