Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Shepard v. Harrison, 01-7427 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7427 Visitors: 28
Filed: Oct. 30, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7427 RICKEY JAMES SHEPARD, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RICKIE HARRISON, Warden of Kershaw Correc- tional Institution; CHARLES M. CONDON, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-00-2794-7-19BG) Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 30, 2001 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Sen
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7427 RICKEY JAMES SHEPARD, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RICKIE HARRISON, Warden of Kershaw Correc- tional Institution; CHARLES M. CONDON, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-00-2794-7-19BG) Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 30, 2001 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rickey James Shepard, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Rickey James Shepard appeals the district court’s order deny- ing 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 cer- tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Shepard v. Harrison, No. CA-00-2794-7- 19BG (D.S.C. July 26, 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