Filed: Feb. 07, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7268 RONALD ALFRED GILES, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus LISA EDWARDS, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-789) Submitted: January 17, 2002 Decided: February 7, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald Alfred Gi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7268 RONALD ALFRED GILES, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus LISA EDWARDS, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-789) Submitted: January 17, 2002 Decided: February 7, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald Alfred Gil..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7268 RONALD ALFRED GILES, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus LISA EDWARDS, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-789) Submitted: January 17, 2002 Decided: February 7, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald Alfred Giles, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Marla Graff Decker, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ronald Alfred Giles, Jr., 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 cer- tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See Giles v. Edwards, No. CA-00-789 (W.D. Va. July 5, 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