Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 42 views

    United States v. Davis, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Percell Davis's application for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. The appellate court found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning or decision to deny the motion and subsequent motions to amend and for reconsideration. Additionally, the court held that Davis's Apprendi claim regarding the retroactivity of new sentencing rules was not cognizable in this collateral proceeding.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Davis, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    42 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Percell Davis's application for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. The appellate court found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning or decision to deny the motion and subsequent motions to amend and for reconsideration. Additionally, the court held that Davis's Apprendi claim regarding the retroactivity of new sentencing rules was not cognizable in this collateral proceeding.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-10-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-7162

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Percell Davis's application for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. The appellate court found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning or decision to deny the motion and subsequent motions to amend and for reconsideration. Additionally, the court held that Davis's Apprendi claim regarding the retroactivity of new sentencing rules was not cognizable in this collateral proceeding.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Davis, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Percell Davis's application for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. The appellate court found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning or decision to deny the motion and subsequent motions to amend and for reconsideration. Additionally, the court held that Davis's Apprendi claim regarding the retroactivity of new sentencing rules was not cognizable in this collateral proceeding.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 01-7162

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    PERCELL A. DAVIS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge.
    (CR-98-47, CA-01-392-2)

    Submitted:

    October 4, 2001

    Decided:

    October 12, 2001

    Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Percell A. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Fernando Groene, OFFICE OF THE
    UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Percell A. Davis seeks to appeal the district courts orders
    denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp.
    2001), and denying subsequent motions to amend his 2255 motion
    and for reconsideration.

    We have reviewed the record and the dis-

    trict courts opinion and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly,

    we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court.*

    United States

    v. Davis, Nos. CR-98-47; CA-01-392-2 (E.D. Va. June 8, June 18, and
    June 27, 2001).

    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

    We recently held in United States v. Sanders, 247 F.3d 139


    (4th Cir. 2001), that the new rule announced in Apprendi v. New
    Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), is not retroactively applicable to
    cases on collateral review. Accordingly, Davis Apprendi claim is
    not cognizable.
    2

    You might also like