Court Opinion

ID: 995687
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 00:40:57.223953+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:42:08.279166
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                             No. 97-7043

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                              Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

DORIS JEAN PREVOST,

                                              Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.    William M. Nickerson, District Judge.
(CR-94-70-WMN, CA-96-209-WMN)

Submitted:   July 22, 1998                 Decided:   July 31, 1998

Before ERVIN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Doris Jean Prevost, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying her

motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994) (current version at 28

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998)). We have reviewed the

record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. United States v. Prevost, Nos. CR-94-70-WMN; CA-96-209-WMN

(D. Md. May 7, 1997). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL

338568 (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). 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

                                2