Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David Lee HILL, a/k/a Bo, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David Lee Hill, a/k/a Bo, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-05-22
Citations: 34 F. App'x 942
Docket Number: Nos. 01-8030, 02-6165
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David Lee HILL, a/k/a Bo, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David Lee Hill, a/k/a Bo, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 34
Pages: 942–943

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David Lee HILL, a/k/a Bo, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David Lee Hill, a/k/a Bo, Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 01-8030, 02-6165.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 22, 2002.
Decided May 22, 2002.
David Lee Hill, Appellant Pro Se. Leslie Bonner McClendon, Office of the United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
David Lee Hill seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying his motions to compel the production of transcripts and other documents in order to challenge his criminal convictions through a habeas motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001). Because Hill's habeas action is no longer pending, we dismiss these appeals as moot. We note, however, that even if we assumed the appeals were not moot, we would agree with the district court that Hill did not make a satisfactory showing of a particularized need for the transcripts under 28 U.S.C. § 753(f) (1994). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and oral argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.