Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

McDonough v. State of SC, 01-7225 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7225 Visitors: 13
Filed: Dec. 06, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7225 JOHN MCDONOUGH, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-01-413-2-19AJ) Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 6, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges
More
                            UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                            No. 01-7225



JOHN MCDONOUGH,

                                             Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus


STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON,
Attorney General of the State of South
Carolina,

                                            Respondents - Appellees.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.
(CA-01-413-2-19AJ)


Submitted:   November 29, 2001            Decided:   December 6, 2001


Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


John McDonough, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy
Attorney General, Tracey Colton Green, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

     John McDonough 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 certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the dis-

trict court.    McDonough v. South Carolina, No. CA-01-413-2-19AJ

(D.S.C. filed July 5, 2001; entered July 6, 2001).     We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade-

quately 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