Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Bobby Foxx v. Edward W. Murray, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, 91-6773 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-6773 Visitors: 14
Filed: Apr. 29, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 931 F.2d 886 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Bobby FOXX, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Edward W. MURRAY, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee. No. 91-6773. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted April 8, 1991
More

931 F.2d 886
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Bobby FOXX, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Edward W. MURRAY, Director, Virginia Department of
Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 91-6773.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 8, 1991.
Decided April 29, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. John A. MacKenzie, Senior District Judge. (CA-90-1300-N)

Bobby Foxx, appellant pro se.

Gayl Branum Carr, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Va., for appellee.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before MURNAGHAN, SPROUSE and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Bobby Foxx seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Foxx v. Murray, CA-90-1300-N (E.D.Va. Jan. 25, 1991). 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.

2

DISMISSED.

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