Court Opinion

ID: 1001488
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:56:23.586023+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:05.206852
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 00-6303

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

MARK PITT, a/k/a Salam,

                                            Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District
Judge. (CR-97-13-H, CA-99-525-5-H)

Submitted:   April 27, 2000                    Decided:   May 3, 2000

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir-
cuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mark Pitt, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant United
States Attorney, J. Frank Bradsher, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Mark Pitt 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 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. Pitt, Nos. CR-97-13-H; CA-99-525-5-H

(E.D.N.C. Jan. 5, 2000).   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