Filed: Dec. 08, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6488 DEANTHONY DOANE, Petitioner – Appellant, v. GENE JOHNSON, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:09-cv-01154-GBL-JFA) Submitted: November 21, 2011 Decided: December 8, 2011 Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6488 DEANTHONY DOANE, Petitioner – Appellant, v. GENE JOHNSON, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:09-cv-01154-GBL-JFA) Submitted: November 21, 2011 Decided: December 8, 2011 Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6488
DEANTHONY DOANE,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
GENE JOHNSON, Director of Virginia Department of
Corrections,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District
Judge. (1:09-cv-01154-GBL-JFA)
Submitted: November 21, 2011 Decided: December 8, 2011
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
DeAnthony Doane, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
In Doane v. Johnson, No. 11-6675 (4th Cir. Nov. 18,
2011) (unpublished), we denied a certificate of appealability
and dismissed DeAnthony Doane’s appeal of the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition.
In the subject appeal, Doane seeks to appeal from the identical
district court order. In light of our decision in No. 11-6675,
we hold that this appeal is moot. Accordingly, we deny a
certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
2