Court Opinion

ID: 1001064
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:50:13.631914+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:12:13.866692
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                             No. 00-6011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

MICHAEL DELANEY ROBERTS,

                                             Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.    William M. Nickerson, District Judge.
(CR-96-291-WMN, CA-99-511-WMN)

Submitted:   March 9, 2000                 Decided:   March 16, 2000

Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cheryl Johns Sturm, Westtown, Pennsylvania, for Appellant. John
Francis Purcell, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Balti-
more, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Michael D. Roberts seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

1999).   We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin-

ion and find no reversible error.    Accordingly, we deny a certifi-

cate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court.   See United States v. Roberts, Nos. CR-96-291-

WMN, CA-99-511-WMN (D. Md. Nov. 8, 1999).     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.

                                                          DISMISSED

                                 2