Filed: Jul. 27, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6389 ALIVE MICHAEL ANDERSON, a/k/a Charles B. Williams, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JAMES B. FRENCH, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CA-97-816-5-F-2) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 27, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6389 ALIVE MICHAEL ANDERSON, a/k/a Charles B. Williams, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JAMES B. FRENCH, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CA-97-816-5-F-2) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 27, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6389 ALIVE MICHAEL ANDERSON, a/k/a Charles B. Williams, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JAMES B. FRENCH, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge. (CA-97-816-5-F-2) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 27, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alive Michael Anderson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Alive Michael Anderson 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 and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Anderson v. French, No. CA-97- 816-5-F-2 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 6, 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 deci- sional process. DISMISSED 2
