Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Turner v. Angelone, 96-6763 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6763 Visitors: 26
Filed: Aug. 21, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6763 ANTHONY TURNER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge. (CA-95-967-N) Submitted: August 15, 1996 Decided: August 21, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and ERVIN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dism
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6763 ANTHONY TURNER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge. (CA-95-967-N) Submitted: August 15, 1996 Decided: August 21, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and ERVIN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony Turner, Appellant Pro Se. Linwood Theodore Wells, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 motion filed under 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 (1988), as 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 district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Turner v. Angelone, No. CA-95-967-N (E.D. Va. Apr. 29, 1996). We also deny Appellant's motion for bail pending appeal and his motion for a certificate of probable cause. 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
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