Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Joseph Johnson v. Warden, Powhatan Correctional Center, 93-6360 (1993)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 93-6360 Visitors: 29
Filed: Jun. 25, 1993
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 996 F.2d 1211 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Joseph JOHNSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN, POWHATAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-6360. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: June 7, 1993. Decided: June 25, 1993. Appeal from the Uni
More

996 F.2d 1211

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Joseph JOHNSON, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
WARDEN, POWHATAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 93-6360.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 7, 1993.
Decided: June 25, 1993.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate Judge. (CA-92-478)

Joseph Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.

Michael Thomas Judge, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before HALL, WILKINSON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

OPINION

1

Joseph Johnson 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. Johnson v. Warden, No. CA-92-478 (E.D. Va. Mar. 11, 1993). 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.

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