Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

94-6403 (1994)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-6403 Visitors: 18
Filed: Jul. 21, 1994
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 32 F.3d 563 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Earvin SMITH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; William Wallace, Warden of Central Correctional Institution; T. Travis Medlock, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees. No. 94-6403. Un
More

32 F.3d 563

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Earvin SMITH, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; William Wallace, Warden of Central
Correctional Institution; T. Travis Medlock,
Attorney General of the State of South
Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 94-6403.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

July 21, 1994.

Earvin Smith, Appellant Pro Se.

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

D.S.C.

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 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. Smith v. South Carolina, No. CA-91-3259-3-20BD (D.S.C. Mar. 24, 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

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