Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Daughton W. Lacey, Jr. v. Edward W. Murray, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General for the State of Virginia, 91-6319 (1992)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-6319 Visitors: 24
Filed: Feb. 13, 1992
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 955 F.2d 41 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Daughton W. LACEY, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Edward W. MURRAY, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections; Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General for the State of Virginia, Respondents-Appellees. No. 91-6319. United States Court
More

955 F.2d 41

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Daughton W. LACEY, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Edward W. MURRAY, Director of Virginia Department of
Corrections; Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General for
the State of Virginia, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 91-6319.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke, No. CA-91-251-R, James C. Turk, Chief District Judge.

Daughton W. Lacey, Jr., appellant pro se.

Virginia Bidwell Theisen, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Va., for appellees.

W.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before WIDENER, HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Daughton W. Lacey 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. Lacey v. Murray, CA-91-251-R (W.D.Va. Oct. 10, 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