Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Alan L. Burns v. William Wallace Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, 92-7197 (1993)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 92-7197 Visitors: 14
Filed: Feb. 24, 1993
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 986 F.2d 1412 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Alan L. BURNS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William WALLACE; Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees. No. 92-7197. Fourth Circuit. Submitted: February 1, 1993 Decided: February 24, 1993 Appeal from the
More

986 F.2d 1412

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Alan L. BURNS, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
William WALLACE; Attorney General of the State of South
Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 92-7197.

Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 1, 1993
Decided: February 24, 1993

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., District Judge. (CA-91-2854-3-OK)

Alan L. Burns, Appellant Pro Se.

Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

D.S.C.

DISMISSED.

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

PER CURIAM:

1

Alan L. Burns appeals from the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988). 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. Burns v. Wallace, No. CA-91-2854-3-OK (D.S.C. Oct. 22, 1992). 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

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