Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Ashley v. Angelone, 01-7006 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7006 Visitors: 43
Filed: Oct. 31, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7006 BENJAMIN CHARLES ASHLEY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-00-913-2) Submitted: October 3, 2001 Decided: October 31, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublishe
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7006 BENJAMIN CHARLES ASHLEY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-00-913-2) Submitted: October 3, 2001 Decided: October 31, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Benjamin Charles Ashley, Appellant Pro Se. Linwood Theodore Wells, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Benjamin Charles Ashley appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001). 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 certif- icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Ashley v. Angelone, No. CA-00-913-2 (E.D. Va. May 31, 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