Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Carter v. Angelone, 97-6792 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-6792 Visitors: 24
Filed: Sep. 23, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6792 JOSEPH CARTER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Depart- ment of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-96-747-3) Submitted: September 11, 1997 Decided: September 23, 1997 Before RUSSELL, MURNAGHAN, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by u
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6792 JOSEPH CARTER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Depart- ment of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-96-747-3) Submitted: September 11, 1997 Decided: September 23, 1997 Before RUSSELL, MURNAGHAN, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberley Ann Whittle, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997), and motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dis- miss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Carter v. Angelone, No. CA-96-747-3 (E.D. Va. Apr. 29, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade- quately 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