United States v. Hinton

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7360
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL LOVELL HINTON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CR-
89-434-S, CA-97-2900-S)
Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: April 20, 1998
Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Lovell Hinton, Appellant Pro Se. Harvey Ellis Eisenberg,
Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying
his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997).
We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, we deny a certificate of appealability
and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.
United States v. Hinton, Nos. CR-89-434-S; CA-97-2900-S (D. Md.
Aug. 22, 1997). 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.
In fact, having carefully reviewed the record and Appellant's
brief, we conclude that Appellant's appeal is frivolous within the
meaning of Fed. R. App. P. 38. See e.g., Brock v. Angelone, 105
F.3d 952 (4th Cir. 1997). We therefore order Appellant to show
cause why sanctions should not be assessed against him.
DISMISSED
2