Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Antonio Andre Stokes v. Ronald Angelone, Director, 96-7104 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-7104 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jan. 06, 1997
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 105 F.3d 648 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Antonio Andre STOKES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald ANGELONE, Director, Respondent-Appellee. No. 96-7104. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 19, 1996. Decided Jan. 6, 1997. Appeal from the United
More

105 F.3d 648

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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

No. 96-7104.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 19, 1996.
Decided Jan. 6, 1997.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate Judge. (CA-96-313-3)

Antonio Andre Stokes, Appellant Pro Se.

Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

E.D.Va.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Stokes v. Angelone, No. CA-96-313-3-(E.D.Va. July 11, 1996). 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