Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Foye v. State of SC, 00-7401 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-7401 Visitors: 22
Filed: Mar. 01, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7401 IRVING FOYE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CA-00-912-9-17RB) Submitted: February 22, 2001 Decided: March 1, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7401 IRVING FOYE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CA-00-912-9-17RB) Submitted: February 22, 2001 Decided: March 1, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Irving Foye, Appellant Pro Se. Derrick K. McFarland, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Irving Foye seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the dis- trict court. Foye v. South Carolina, No. CA-00-912-9-17RB (D.S.C. filed Sept. 11, 2000; entered Sept. 12, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer