UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-6848
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
SAMUEL ROBERT QUEEN, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 99-6849
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
SAMUEL ROBERT QUEEN, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Walter E. Black, Jr., Senior District
Judge. (CR-93-369-B, CA-97-2980-B)
Submitted: December 29, 1999 Decided: January 13, 2000
Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Cir-
cuit Judge.
No. 99-6848 dismissed and No. 99-6849 affirmed by unpublished per
curiam opinion.
Samuel Robert Queen, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
2
PER CURIAM:
Samuel R. Queen, Jr., appeals from the district court’s order
denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for relief from the
court’s prior judgment on his Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e) motion (No.
99-6849). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s
opinion and find no reversible error. We therefore affirm the de-
nial of this motion on the reasoning of the district court. See
United States v. Queen, Nos. CR-93-369-B; CA-97-2980-B (D. Md.
May 14, 1999).
Queen also appeals the district court’s order denying his mo-
tion for recusal of the district judge in the proceedings involving
Queen’s motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999)
(No. 99-6848). Because Queen’s informal brief fails to contain any
argument concerning the district court’s decision denying his re-
cusal motion, consideration of this claim is waived. See 4th Cir.
R. 34(b). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and
dismiss this appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See
United States v. Queen, Nos. CR-93-369-B; CA-97-2980-B (D. Md. May
14, 1999). 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.
No. 99-6848 - DISMISSED
No. 99-6849 - AFFIRMED
3