Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 10 views

    United States v. Cain, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which David Anthony Cain appealed a district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, denying Cain's motion. The court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. Cain's request for appointment of counsel was also denied.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Cain, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which David Anthony Cain appealed a district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, denying Cain's motion. The court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. Cain's request for appointment of counsel was also denied.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-02-04 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-7852

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a court case in which David Anthony Cain appealed a district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, denying Cain's motion. The court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. Cain's request for appointment of counsel was also denied.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Cain, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which David Anthony Cain appealed a district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, denying Cain's motion. The court dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. Cain's request for appointment of counsel was also denied.

    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. 96-7852

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    DAVID ANTHONY CAIN,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert J. Staker, Senior
    District Judge. (CR-93-95, CA-95-1154-3)
    Submitted:

    January 13, 1998

    Decided:

    February 4, 1998

    Before HALL, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    David Anthony Cain, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE
    OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion
    filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (1994) (current version at 28 U.S.C.A.
    2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). We have reviewed the record and
    the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United
    States v. Cain, Nos. CR-93-95; CA-95-1154-3 (S.D.W. Va. Aug. 1 &
    Nov. 20, 1996). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL 338568
    (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel is denied. 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.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like