Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Aaron David Griffith v. Ronald J. Angelone, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, 95-7935 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-7935 Visitors: 4
Filed: Apr. 29, 1996
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 85 F.3d 616 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Aaron David GRIFFITH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee. No. 95-7935. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted April 15, 1996. Decid
More

85 F.3d 616

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Aaron David GRIFFITH, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department of
Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 95-7935.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 15, 1996.
Decided April 29, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-964-2)

Aaron David Griffith, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Griffith v. Angelone, No. CA-95-964-2 (E.D.Va. Nov. 17, 1995). 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