Court Opinion

ID: 1006496
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 19:12:12.125466+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:22.948413
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 01-7238

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

MICHAEL O. LOCKHART,

                                              Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (CR-97-7-V, CA-01-344-3-V)

Submitted:   January 17, 2002             Decided:   January 28, 2002

Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael O. Lockhart, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Jack Higdon, Jr.,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Michael O. Lockhart appeals the district court’s order denying

his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001).    We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeal-

ability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. See United States v. Lockhart, Nos. CR-97-7-V; CA-01-344-3-

V (W.D.N.C. June 26, 2001). 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