Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

William L. Owens v. Edward Murray, Director, 94-6355 (1994)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-6355 Visitors: 28
Filed: Jul. 20, 1994
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 30 F.3d 130 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. William L. OWENS, Petitioner Appellant, v. Edward MURRAY, Director, Respondent Appellee. No. 94-6355. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted June 23, 1994. Decided July 20, 1994. Appeal from the United States Dis
More

30 F.3d 130

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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

No. 94-6355.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 23, 1994.
Decided July 20, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert R. Merhige, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-93-570-R)

William L. Owens, Appellant Pro Se.

Robert H. Anderson, III, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, VA, for Appellee.

DISMISSED.

Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion 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-93-570-R (E.D. Va. Feb. 23, 1994).* 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

*

We deny Appellant's motion for "removal of this action from state jurisdiction."

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