Case ID: f-appx_19/html/0129-01.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. James M. DEBARDELEBEN, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 01-6708.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 20, 2001.
    Decided Sept. 26, 2001.
    James M. Debardeleben, pro se. Tarra R. DeShields Minnis, Office of the United States Attorney, Baltimore, MD, for appellee.
    Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

James M. Debardeleben seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001) and denying his motion for reconsideration. 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. Debardeleben, Nos. CR-84-43-B; CA-01-18-B (D. Md. Jan. 26 & Feb. 20, 2001). Debardeleben’s “petition for initial hearing en banc” is denied. We grant his “motion for hearing of appeal on original record without appendix.” 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.