United States v. Rose
United States v. Rose
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7123
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
EATON ROSE, a/k/a Tony Barrett,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., District Judge. (CR-01-421; CA-03-613-1)
Submitted: June 18, 2007 Decided: December 11, 2007
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Eaton Rose, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Eaton Rose filed an appeal from the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
denying relief on his
28 U.S.C. § 2255(2000) motion. We
previously granted a certificate of appealability on the sole issue
of whether counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to
file an appeal on Rose’s behalf. We denied a certificate of
appealability and dismissed the appeal as to all other issues. See
United States v. Rose, No. 04-7123 (4th Cir. July 31, 2007)
(unpublished order).
After full consideration of the informal briefs and
record in this case pertaining to Rose’s remaining claim, we find
no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. Rose v. United States, Nos. 1:01-cr-421-1;
1:03-cv-613 (M.D.N.C. Apr. 30, 2004). 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
- 2 -
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished