Court Opinion

ID: 988972
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-03 23:00:16.172553+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:13.534667
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 95-7697

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

         versus

SHARON P. MICKLE,

                                              Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CR-91-44-R, CA-95-823-3)

Submitted:   March 21, 1996                 Decided:   April 10, 1996

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sharon P. Mickle, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Hannah Lauck, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. 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.
Mickle, Nos. CR-91-44-R; CA-95-823-3 (E.D. Va. Oct. 10, 1995). 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