0% found this document useful (0 votes)
27 views2 pages

United States v. Jimmy Wayne Martin, 86 F.3d 1153, 4th Cir. (1996)

The document is an appeals court ruling affirming the denial of a defendant's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. It summarizes that the court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate's recommendation to deny the defendant's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the facts and legal arguments adequately presented without needing oral arguments.
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
27 views2 pages

United States v. Jimmy Wayne Martin, 86 F.3d 1153, 4th Cir. (1996)

The document is an appeals court ruling affirming the denial of a defendant's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. It summarizes that the court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate's recommendation to deny the defendant's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The appeals court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the facts and legal arguments adequately presented without needing oral arguments.
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

86 F.

3d 1153

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) 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of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing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service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth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.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Jimmy Wayne MARTIN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 95-7288.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


Submitted Jan.23, 1996.
Decided May 20, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of
North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., District Judge. (CR91-239; CA-94-582-2)
Jimmy Wayne Martin, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Alexander Weinman,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
M.D.N.C.
AFFIRMED.
Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, WIDENER, Circuit Judge, and
PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. 2255
(1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible
error. We affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. United

States v. Martin, Nos. CR-91-239; CA-94-582-2 (M.D.N.C. July 31, 1995).


2

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