Notice: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) States That Citation of Unpublished Dispositions is Disfavored Except for Establishing Res Judicata, Estoppel, or the Law of the Case and Requires Service of Copies of Cited Unpublished Dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.united States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Ronnie Earl Melton, Defendant-appellant, 61 F.3d 901 (4th Cir. 1995)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit - 61 F.3d 901 (4th Cir. 1995) Submitted: March 28, 1995Decided: July 6, 1995

Ronnie Earl Melton, Appellant Pro Se. Michael R. Smythers, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, VA; Thomas More Hollenhorst, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, VA, for Appellee.

Before HALL, WILKINSON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

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, while we grant Appellant's motion to file a supplemental informal brief, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.*  United States v. Melton, Nos. CR-91-526-A and CA92-1817-AM (E.D. Va. Oct. 26, 1994). 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

 *

We find that the district court's failure to consider Appellant's motion to amend his Sec. 2255 motion to be harmless error in this case because the claim Appellant sought to advance in that motion was without merit. The amendment to the United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual, Sec. 3E1.1 (Nov.1992), is not retroactive. See USSG Sec. 1B1.10

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.