Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Green v. State of SC, 97-6361 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-6361 Visitors: 61
Filed: Jul. 30, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6361 LLOYD GREEN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-96-616-19BD) Submitted: July 14, 1998 Decided: July 30, 1998 Before HAMILTON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curia
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6361 LLOYD GREEN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-96-616-19BD) Submitted: July 14, 1998 Decided: July 30, 1998 Before HAMILTON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lloyd Green, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealabil- ity and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Green v. South Carolina, No. CA-96-616-19BD (D.S.C. Feb. 18, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions 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