Court Opinion

ID: 1005893
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 19:03:13.377443+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:02.701390
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
 

  Stephen James Mills appeals from the district court’s order denying his Rule 60(b)(4) motion. We have reviewed the
   
   *190
   
  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. Mills,
  
  No. CR-97-815 (D.S.C. filed Aug. 27, 2001; entered Aug. 28, 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.
 

   AFFIRMED.