Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Bruce Andrew Ainsley v. David K. Smith, Warden, 91-6685 (1992)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-6685 Visitors: 12
Filed: Feb. 13, 1992
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 955 F.2d 40 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Bruce Andrew AINSLEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. David K. SMITH, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. No. 91-6685. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 3, 1992. Decided Feb. 13, 1992. Appeal from the United States D
More

955 F.2d 40

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Bruce Andrew AINSLEY, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
David K. SMITH, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 91-6685.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 3, 1992.
Decided Feb. 13, 1992.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond, No. CA-91-382-3, Richard L. Williams, District Judge.

Bruce Andrew Ainsley, appellant pro se.

Robert Quentin Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Va., for appellee.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before WIDENER, HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Bruce Andrew Ainsley seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion 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. Ainsley v. Smith, No. CA-91-382-3 (E.D.Va. Nov. 14, 1991). 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