Case ID: f-appx_51/html/0436-01.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. Jonathan EDWARDS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-6507.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 21, 2002.
    Decided Dec. 2, 2002.
    Jonathan Edwards, Appellant Pro Se. Anne Margaret Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Jonathan Edwards appeals from the district’s order denying his “Motion to Reopen,” in which he asserts that he should not have been sentenced as an armed career criminal for his 1993 conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (2000). Edwards faded to raise this issue in his direct criminal appeal. Moreover, the time for seeking post-conviction relief has long since expired. 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). Consequently, we affirm. 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.