Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Michael W. Owens v. Edward W. Murray, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, 91-7165 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-7165 Visitors: 24
Filed: Oct. 25, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 947 F.2d 941 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Michael W. OWENS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Edward W. MURRAY, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-7165. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 30, 1991. Decided Oct
More

947 F.2d 941

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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

No. 91-7165.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 30, 1991.
Decided Oct. 25, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-91-172-N)

Michael W. Owens, appellant pro se.

Robert H. Anderson, III, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Va., for appellee.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before K.K. HALL and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Michael W. Owens seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion adopting 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. Owens v. Murray, No. CA-91-172-N (E.D.Va. July 15, 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