Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Godwin v. McDade, 01-7307 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7307 Visitors: 61
Filed: Jan. 09, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7307 HAROLD GODWIN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus M. J. MCDADE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-5-5-BR) Submitted: December 11, 2001 Decided: January 9, 2002 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bruce Tracy Cunningham, Jr., C
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7307 HAROLD GODWIN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus M. J. MCDADE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-5-5-BR) Submitted: December 11, 2001 Decided: January 9, 2002 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bruce Tracy Cunningham, Jr., CUNNINGHAM, DEDMOND, PETERSEN & SMITH, Southern Pines, North Carolina, for Appellant. Sandra Wallace- Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Harold Godwin seeks to appeal 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. Godwin v. McDade, No. CA-01-5-5-BR (E.D.N.C. filed July 19, 2001; entered July 24, 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