Filed: Jul. 02, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-31476 Summary Calendar CHARLES WILLIAMS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus BARON KAYLO, Warden Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 98-CV-3506-J - June 28, 2001 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:1 Charles Williams, Louisiana state prisoner number 281980, has appealed the district court's judgment dismissing his federal habeas
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-31476 Summary Calendar CHARLES WILLIAMS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus BARON KAYLO, Warden Respondent-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 98-CV-3506-J - June 28, 2001 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:1 Charles Williams, Louisiana state prisoner number 281980, has appealed the district court's judgment dismissing his federal habeas a..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-31476
Summary Calendar
CHARLES WILLIAMS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
BARON KAYLO, Warden
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 98-CV-3506-J
--------------------
June 28, 2001
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:1
Charles Williams, Louisiana state prisoner number 281980, has
appealed the district court's judgment dismissing his federal
habeas application. Our review is limited to the issue certified
by the district court in its certificate of appealability— "whether
petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel because his
attorney failed to secure the presence at trial of Louis Berlier as
a witness." See Lackey v. Johnson,
116 F.3d 149, 151-52 (5th Cir.
1997). Williams has not shown that the state court's rejection of
this issue involved an unreasonable application of clearly
1
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
established federal law as determined by the United States Supreme
Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). Thus, the district court's
denial of habeas relief is
AFFIRMED.
2