Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

916 F.2d 711

Docket No. 90-6607.

United States v. Charles E. Paris

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Oct. 1, 1990. Decided Oct. 24, 1990.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1990-10-24

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on United States v. Pegram

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1990-10-24

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden, II, Chief District Judge. (CA-88-85-2)

Charles E. Paris, appellant pro se.

John Kirk Brandfass, Office of the United States Attorney, Charleston, W.V., for appellee.

S.D.W.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before DONALD RUSSELL and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Charles E. Paris appeals from the district court's order refusing relief under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion adopting the magistrate's recommendation discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Paris, CA-88-85-2 (S.D.W.Va. June 22, 1990). 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.

¶2

AFFIRMED.

/916/f2d/711 · .json · Public domain