From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Steglich, 211 Fed.Appx. 225

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jan 8, 2007
212 F. App'x 225 (4th Cir. 2007)

Opinion

No. 06-7091.

Submitted: December 20, 2006.

Decided: January 8, 2007.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James P. Jones, Chief District Judge (3:00-cr-00063-JHM; 7:06-cv-00055-JPJ)

Lance Bishop Steglich, Appellant Pro Se. Ray B. Fitzgerald, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


Lance Bishop Steglich appeals the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his pleading captioned as "An Independent Action Motion for Reconsideration Writ of Habeas Corpus." We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Steglich, Nos. 3:00-cr-00063-JHM; 7:06-cv-00055-JPJ (W.D. Va. May 3, 2006). 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


Summaries of

U.S. v. Steglich, 211 Fed.Appx. 225

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jan 8, 2007
212 F. App'x 225 (4th Cir. 2007)
Case details for

U.S. v. Steglich, 211 Fed.Appx. 225

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LANCE BISHOP STEGLICH…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Jan 8, 2007

Citations

212 F. App'x 225 (4th Cir. 2007)

Citing Cases

Steglich v. U.S.

Steglich first argues that the motion is timely because the limitation period must be tolled during the…