Filed: Jul. 29, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6494 GEORGE HAIGLER, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-97-3070-0-17BD) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 29, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Di
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6494 GEORGE HAIGLER, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-97-3070-0-17BD) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 29, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dis..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6494 GEORGE HAIGLER, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-97-3070-0-17BD) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 29, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. George Haigler, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: George Haigler, Jr., seeks to appeal 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 mag- istrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the rea- soning of the district court. Haigler v. South Carolina, No. CA-97- 3070-0-17BD (D.S.C. Feb. 23, 1998). 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