Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Coffin v. Angelone, 96-6617 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6617 Visitors: 11
Filed: Jan. 24, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6617 DEXTER DRAKE COFFIN, III, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Depart- ment of Corrections, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-96-8) Submitted: November 26, 1996 Decided: January 24, 1997 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6617 DEXTER DRAKE COFFIN, III, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Depart- ment of Corrections, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CA-96-8) Submitted: November 26, 1996 Decided: January 24, 1997 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dexter Drake Coffin, III, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 appeals from 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 affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Coffin v. Angelone, No. CA-96-8 (E.D. Va. Apr. 10, 1996). Additionally, we deny Appellant's motions for: 1) a stay of his state court conviction; 2) bail pending his appeal; 3) an expedited appeal; and 4) oral argument. We dispense with oral argument be- cause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the deci- sional process. AFFIRMED 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