Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Rowe v. Director Dept Corr, 01-6559 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-6559 Visitors: 26
Filed: Aug. 15, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6559 BRIAN LEE ROWE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-99-457) Submitted: August 9, 2001 Decided: August 15, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brian Lee Rowe, Appellan
More
                              UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 01-6559



BRIAN LEE ROWE,

                                              Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus


DIRECTOR, Department of Corrections,

                                               Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.
(CA-99-457)


Submitted:   August 9, 2001                 Decided:   August 15, 2001


Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Brian Lee Rowe, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Andrew Witmer, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Brian Lee Rowe seeks to appeal the district court’s orders

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 opinions and find no reversible error.     Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the

reasoning of the district court.     See Rowe v. Director, Dep’t of

Corr., No. CA-99-457 (E.D. Va. Mar. 17, 2000 & Mar. 8, 2001).    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.




                                                          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