United States v. Crosby ( 1999 )

Opinion on Rehearing
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-6543
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JEFFREY ROY CROSBY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. C. Weston Houck, Chief District
Judge. (CR-95-619, CA-96-788-4-12)
Submitted: October 8, 1999 Decided: December 13, 1999
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jeffrey Roy Crosby, Appellant Pro Se. William Earl Day, II,
Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
This appeal is before us on Appellant Jeffrey Roy Crosby’s
petition for rehearing. We denied a certificate of appealability
and dismissed on the merits Crosby’s appeal of the district court’s
denial of his motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West
Supp. 1999). However, in light of new evidence that Crosby’s §
2255 motion was filed prior to the enactment of the Antiterrorism
and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, we grant rehearing and
affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States
v. Crosby, Nos. CR-95-619; CA-96-788-4-12 (D.S.C. Mar. 30, 1999).
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 -