Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Donald P. Alberty v. Gary T. Dixon, Warden Attorney General of the State of North Carolina, 89-6774 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 89-6774 Visitors: 10
Filed: Jan. 24, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 896 F.2d 545 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Donald P. ALBERTY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gary T. DIXON, Warden; Attorney General of the State of North Carolina, Respondents-Appellees. No. 89-6774. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submit
More

896 F.2d 545
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Donald P. ALBERTY, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Gary T. DIXON, Warden; Attorney General of the State of
North Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 89-6774.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Nov. 29, 1989.
Decided: Jan. 24, 1990.

Donald P. Alberty, appellant pro se.

Before MURNAGHAN, SPROUSE and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Donald P. Alberty seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, although we grant Alberty's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Alberty v. Dixon, C/A No. 89-103-C-S (M.D.N.C. July 21, 1989). 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.

2

DISMISSED.

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