Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARQUIS ANTHONY NELSON, a/k/a Marquis L. Nelson, Defendant - Appellant.
MARQUIS ANTHONY NELSON, a/k/a Marquis L. Nelson, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee.
In these consolidated appeals, Marquis Anthony Nelson challenges the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying several postjudgment motions.* Nelson also argues that the magistrate judge erred in denying his motion for production of certain documents. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Nelson's motions for a certificate of appealability and for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Nelson, Nos. 1:08-cr-00058-1; 1:15-cv-13059 (S.D.W. Va. Dec. 2, 2015 & Mar. 7, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE. We previously remanded Case No. 16-6408 for the limited purpose of permitting the district court to supplement the record with an order granting or denying a certificate of appealability. The court denied a certificate of appealability, and Nelson also challenges that order. Upon closer examination, it appears that an order granting or denying a certificate of appealability was unnecessary. The court did not consolidate Nelson's postjudgment motions and construe them as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. Instead, the court honored Nelson's request and considered the motions as he presented them.
PER CURIAM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 16-6407, No. 16-6408
Decided: July 22, 2016
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)