Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Tucker v. Clinton, 95-7371 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-7371 Visitors: 24
Filed: Feb. 22, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7371 CORNELIUS TUCKER, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus BILL CLINTON, President; J. B. FRENCH; MIKE EASLEY; MAGISTRATE DIXON, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-95-470-5-BR) Submitted: February 7, 1996 Decided: February 22, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7371 CORNELIUS TUCKER, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus BILL CLINTON, President; J. B. FRENCH; MIKE EASLEY; MAGISTRATE DIXON, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-95-470-5-BR) Submitted: February 7, 1996 Decided: February 22, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cornelius Tucker, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Cornelius Tucker appeals from the district court's order dis- missing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) petition as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses no abuse of discretion and that this appeal is without merit. We amend the district court's judg- ment to reflect that this dismissal is without prejudice. 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (1988). Accordingly, although we grant Tucker's motion for a certifi- cate of probable cause to appeal, we affirm the district court's dismissal order as modified. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED 2
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