# United States v. Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · September 13, 2001 · 18 F. App'x 186

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1005287

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Patrick Allen BROWN, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** September 13, 2001
- **Citations:** 18 F. App'x 186
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Widener, Williams, Traxler
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1005287

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-6868

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

PATRICK ALLEN BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR-
96-418-PJM, CA-00-561-PJM)

Submitted: September 6, 2001 Decided: September 13, 2001

Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Patrick Allen Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Gina Laurie Simms, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

Patrick Allen Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin-

ion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certif-

icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. See United States v. Brown, Nos. CR-96-418-

PJM; CA-00-561-PJM (D. Md. filed Mar. 2, 2001; entered Mar. 5,

2001). 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.

DISMISSED

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1005287. Public record. Not legal advice.