Court Opinion

ID: 992472
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-03 23:52:33.259047+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:22.168136
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                             No. 97-6363

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

MICHAEL SMALLEN,

                                            Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District
Judge. (CR-88-126-N, CA-97-198-N)

Submitted:   June 12, 1997                 Decided:   June 26, 1997

Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Smallen, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Dee Griffith, Jr.,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia; Lawrence
Eugene Spong, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria,
Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997).

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 dis-
trict court. United States v. Smallen, Nos. CR-88-126-N; CA-97-198-
N (E.D. Va. Feb. 18, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-

terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.

                                                         DISMISSED

                                2