Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    United States v. Gregory Uzzell, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Gregory Uzzell's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as untimely and barred by the appellate waiver in his plea agreement. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment, finding that Uzzell forfeited appellate review because his informal brief did not challenge the bases for the district court's dismissal of his § 2255 motion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Gregory Uzzell, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Gregory Uzzell's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as untimely and barred by the appellate waiver in his plea agreement. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment, finding that Uzzell forfeited appellate review because his informal brief did not challenge the bases for the district court's dismissal of his § 2255 motion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-07-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6147

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Gregory Uzzell's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as untimely and barred by the appellate waiver in his plea agreement. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment, finding that Uzzell forfeited appellate review because his informal brief did not challenge the bases for the district court's dismissal of his § 2255 motion.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Gregory Uzzell, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Gregory Uzzell's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as untimely and barred by the appellate waiver in his plea agreement. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment, finding that Uzzell forfeited appellate review because his informal brief did not challenge the bases for the district court's dismissal of his § 2255 motion.

    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. 14-6147

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    GREGORY UZZELL,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    Louise W. Flanagan,
    District Judge. (4:04-cr-00076-FL-1; 4:12-cv-00185-FL)

    Submitted:

    June 30, 2014

    Decided:

    July 17, 2014

    Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Gregory Uzzell, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas B. Murphy, Assistant


    United States Attorney, Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
    STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina; Imelda Jean Pate,
    OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, Kinston, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Gregory

    Uzzell

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    dismissing his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2012) motion as untimely and


    barred
    appeal,

    by
    we

    the

    appellate

    confine

    Appellants brief.

    our

    waiver
    review

    in
    to

    his
    the

    plea

    agreement.

    issues

    See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).

    raised

    in

    On
    the

    Because Uzzells

    informal brief does not challenge the bases for the district
    courts disposition of his 2255 motion, Uzzell has forfeited
    appellate review of the courts order.
    the district courts judgment.

    Accordingly, we affirm

    We dispense with oral argument

    because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented


    in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
    the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like