Court Opinion

ID: 1000856
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:47:06.335052+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:35:16.927089
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                             No. 99-7057

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus

EDDIE DEAN MEEKS,

                                             Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District
Judge. (CR-96-68, CA-98-466-7)

Submitted:   February 10, 2000          Decided:     February 15, 2000

Before WIDENER and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eddie Dean Meeks, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph William Hooge Mott,
Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Eddie Dean Meeks 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 certif-

icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. See United States v. Meeks, Nos. CR-96-68; CA-

98-466-7 (W.D. Va. July 15, 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