Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    Williams v. Nuth, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Floyd Glenn Williams of the denial of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 motion in district court and the denial of his Rule 59(e) motion. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and district court orders and found no reversible error. The appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning of the district court orders.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Williams v. Nuth, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Floyd Glenn Williams of the denial of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 motion in district court and the denial of his Rule 59(e) motion. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and district court orders and found no reversible error. The appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning of the district court orders.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-10-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-6536

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Floyd Glenn Williams of the denial of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 motion in district court and the denial of his Rule 59(e) motion. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and district court orders and found no reversible error. The appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning of the district court orders.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    11 views2 pages

    Williams v. Nuth, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Floyd Glenn Williams of the denial of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 motion in district court and the denial of his Rule 59(e) motion. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and district court orders and found no reversible error. The appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning of the district court orders.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 97-6536

    FLOYD GLENN WILLIAMS,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    EUGENE NUTH; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF
    MARYLAND,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA96-2278-DKC)
    Submitted:

    September 25, 1997

    Decided:

    October 8, 1997

    Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.


    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Floyd Glenn Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Tarra R. DeShields-Minnis,
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland; Ann
    Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying
    his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997),
    and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the
    record and the district court's orders and find no reversible
    error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Williams v.
    Nuth, No. CA-96-2278-DKC (D. Md. Mar. 5 & 24, 1997). 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

    You might also like