Gary Williams v. Suffolk Circuit Court

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999381074-2] Originating case number: 3:11-cv-00125-HEH,3:12-cv-00078-HEH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999404598]. Mailed to: appellant. [14-6855]

Appeal: 14-6855

Doc: 9

Filed: 07/29/2014

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6855

GARY WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
SUFFOLK CIRCUIT COURT,
Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:11-cv-00125-HEH; 3:12-cv-00078-HEH)

Submitted:

July 24, 2014

Before FLOYD and
Circuit Judge.

THACKER,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

and

July 29, 2014

DAVIS,

Senior

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gary Buterra Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-6855

Doc: 9

Filed: 07/29/2014

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Gary
order

denying

remanding

his

Buterra
his

Williams

motion

state

to

appeals

the

reconsider

prosecution

to

state

district

the

court’s

court.

reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

court’s

We

order
have

Accordingly,

although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm
the district court’s order.

To the extent that Williams sought

to challenge the state court judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(2012), he is not entitled to relief pursuant to that statute.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (providing remedies for a motion attacking
a

federal

conviction

and

sentence).

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

2