Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Moore v. Powell, 01-7870 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7870 Visitors: 30
Filed: Mar. 11, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7870 JOSEPH FREDERICK MOORE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus H. R. POWELL, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-97-595-3) Submitted: February 13, 2002 Decided: March 11, 2002 Before WIDENER and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7870 JOSEPH FREDERICK MOORE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus H. R. POWELL, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-97-595-3) Submitted: February 13, 2002 Decided: March 11, 2002 Before WIDENER and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Frederick Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assis- tant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Joseph Frederick Moore seeks to appeal the district court’s orders (1) denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for relief from the judgment dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001), as untimely; and (2) denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Moore v. Powell, No. CA-97-595-3 (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 30, 2001 & entered May 1, 2001; Oct. 5, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions 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