United States of America, Plaintiff Appellee, v. Richard Flores, Defendant Appellant, 34 F.3d 1067 (4th Cir. 1994)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit - 34 F.3d 1067 (4th Cir. 1994) Submitted August 9, 1994. Decided August 19, 1994

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CR-91-52-BR, CA-93-64-BR).

Richard Flores, Appellant Pro Se.

Christine Witcover Dean, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, NC, for Appellee.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before HALL and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:


Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. 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. Flores, Nos. CR-91-52-BR; CA-93-64-BR (E.D.N.C. Sept. 17, 1993). 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

 *

While the Government's submission of its motion for summary judgment required that notice and an opportunity to respond be given to the plaintiff pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309, 310 (4th Cir. 1975), we find that the failure of the district court to issue such notice was harmless error in this case

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.