Filed: Jan. 25, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-6657 NESTOR G. GONZALES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus ELLIS B. WRIGHT, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-584-R) Submitted: January 9, 1996 Decided: January 25, 1996 Before HALL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nesto
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-6657 NESTOR G. GONZALES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus ELLIS B. WRIGHT, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-584-R) Submitted: January 9, 1996 Decided: January 25, 1996 Before HALL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nestor..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-6657 NESTOR G. GONZALES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus ELLIS B. WRIGHT, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-584-R) Submitted: January 9, 1996 Decided: January 25, 1996 Before HALL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nestor G. Gonzales, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. ยง 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 ap- peal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Gonzales v. Wright, No. CA-94-584-R (E.D. Va. Mar. 22, 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. DISMISSED 2
