Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Michael Dunbar Quarles v. Director of Virginia Department of Corrections, 92-7103 (1993)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 92-7103 Visitors: 41
Filed: Oct. 25, 1993
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 8 F.3d 819 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Michael Dunbar QUARLES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent-Appellee. No. 92-7103. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: March 12, 1993. Decided: October 25, 1993.
More

8 F.3d 819

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Michael Dunbar QUARLES, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
DIRECTOR OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 92-7103.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 12, 1993.
Decided: October 25, 1993.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond.

Michael Dunbar Quarles, Appellant Pro Se.

Oliver Lewis Norrell, III, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before WIDENER and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

OPINION

1

Michael Dunbar Quarles seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C.s 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. Quarles v. Director of Va. Dep't of Corrections, No. CA-92-164-R (E.D. Va. Sept. 15, 1992). 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