Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Peter PAUL, a/k/a Derrick Anderson, a/k/a Paul Eustance, a/k/a Mark Harris, a/k/a Mark Eric Green, a/k/a Peter P. Alexander, a/k/a Sluggie, a/k/a Peter Paul Alexander, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-02-06
Citations: 28 F. App'x 276
Docket Number: No. 01-7435
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Peter PAUL, a/k/a Derrick Anderson, a/k/a Paul Eustance, a/k/a Mark Harris, a/k/a Mark Eric Green, a/k/a Peter P. Alexander, a/k/a Sluggie, a/k/a Peter Paul Alexander, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 28
Pages: 276–277

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Peter PAUL, a/k/a Derrick Anderson, a/k/a Paul Eustance, a/k/a Mark Harris, a/k/a Mark Eric Green, a/k/a Peter P. Alexander, a/k/a Sluggie, a/k/a Peter Paul Alexander, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 01-7435.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 31, 2002.
Decided Feb. 6, 2002.
Peter Paul, Appellant Pro Se. David John Novak, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Peter Paul seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Paul's motions for a certificate of appealability and to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Paul, Nos. CR-95-104; CA-01-505-3 (E.D.Va. Aug. 6, 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.
DISMISSED.