Court Opinion

ID: 997878
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:03:25.145987+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:33:43.450614
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 98-7690

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

DANNY THIEMECKE,

                                            Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis-
trict of West Virginia, at Parkersburg. Charles H. Haden II, Chief
District Judge. (CR-88-39, CA-97-397-6)

Submitted:   February 11, 1999         Decided:     February 25, 1999

Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Danny Thiemecke, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Danny Thiemecke seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998).   We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

find no reversible error.   Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the dis-

trict court. See United States v. Thiemecke, Nos. CR-88-39; CA-97-

397-6 (S.D.W. Va. Sept. 18, 1998).    We deny Thiemecke’s motion for

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-

ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

                                                          DISMISSED

                                  2