United States v. Marsh
United States v. Marsh
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 94-7481
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
STACEY LAMAR MARSH,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 98-6408
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
STACEY LAMAR MARSH,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Huntington. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CR-91-114, CA-94-399-3)
Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 22, 1998 Before MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and HALL and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stacey Lamar Marsh, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).
2 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. 1998)). We have reviewed the
record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the dis-
trict court. United States v. Marsh, Nos. CR-91-114; CA-94-399-3
(S.D.W. Va. Nov. 2, 1994, and Feb. 5, 1998). See Lindh v. Murphy,
521 U.S. 320(1997). Further, we deny as moot Appellant’s motions
to amend or supplement his § 2255 motion, to place appeal in abey-
ance, and for other general relief. 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 deci-
sional process.
AFFIRMED
3
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished