Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Ricky Lee Owens v. Edward W. Murray, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections, 89-6784 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 89-6784 Visitors: 20
Filed: May 17, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 905 F.2d 1531 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Ricky Lee OWENS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Edward W. MURRAY, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee. No. 89-6784. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted May 7
More

905 F.2d 1531
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Ricky Lee OWENS, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Edward W. MURRAY, Director of Virginia Department of
Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 89-6784.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 7, 1990.
Decided May 17, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge. (C/A No. 89-116-N)

Ricky Lee Owens, appellant pro se.

Frank Snead Ferguson, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Va., for appellee.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and CHAPMAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Ricky Lee Owens 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, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Owens v. Murray, C/A No. 89-116-N (E.D.Va. July 19, 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