Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Roosevelt Taylor, Jr. v. David A. Williams, 90-6198 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-6198 Visitors: 27
Filed: Feb. 25, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 927 F.2d 597 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Roosevelt TAYLOR, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. David A. WILLIAMS, Respondent-Appellee. No. 90-6198. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 4, 1991. Decided Feb. 25, 1991. Appeal fro
More

927 F.2d 597
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Roosevelt TAYLOR, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
David A. WILLIAMS, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 90-6198.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 4, 1991.
Decided Feb. 25, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, District Judge. (CA-90-350-3)

Roosevelt Taylor, Jr., appellant pro se.

Robert B. Condon, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Va., for appellee.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before DONALD RUSSELL, SPROUSE and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Roosevelt Taylor, Jr. 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 discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Taylor v. Williams, CA-90-350-3 (E.D.Va. Nov. 30, 1990). 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