Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 12 views

    United States v. Hayes, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Morris Eugene Hayes appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court denied Hayes a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Hayes was not entitled to relief under § 2255.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Hayes, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    12 views2 pages
    Morris Eugene Hayes appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court denied Hayes a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Hayes was not entitled to relief under § 2255.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-04-01 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 98-7584

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Morris Eugene Hayes appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court denied Hayes a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Hayes was not entitled to relief under § 2255.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Hayes, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Morris Eugene Hayes appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court denied Hayes a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Hayes was not entitled to relief under § 2255.

    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. 98-7584

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    MORRIS EUGENE HAYES, a/k/a Easy,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge.
    (CR-94-163, CA-98-366)

    Submitted:

    February 23, 1999

    Decided:

    April 1, 1999

    Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit
    Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Morris Eugene Hayes, Appellant Pro Se. Laura P. Tayman, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Morris Eugene Hayes seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West 1994 &
    Supp. 1998).

    We have reviewed the record and the district courts

    opinion and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we deny a cer-

    tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning


    of the district court. See United States v. Hayes, Nos. CR-94-163;
    CA-98-366 (E.D. Va. Sept. 3, 1998). 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.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like