Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.William F. BRECKENRIDGE, Defendant-Appellant
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. - 993 F.2d 1539
Submitted: May 3, 1993Decided: May 20, 1993
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Chief District Judge. (CR-90-209, CA-91-465-R)
William F. Breckenridge, Appellant Pro Se.
Jean Barrett Hudson, Office of the United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
W.D.Va.
AFFIRMED.
Before RUSSELL and HALL, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
William F. Breckenridge appeals from the district court's order refusing relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.* United States v. Breckenridge, Nos. CR-90-209, CA-91-465R (W.D. Va. Sept. 25, 1992). 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