Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Ronald Edward Davis v. Ronald J. Angelone, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, 94-7096 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-7096 Visitors: 19
Filed: Feb. 17, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 50 F.3d 5 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Ronald Edward DAVIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee. No. 94-7096. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: January 19, 1995 Decid
More

50 F.3d 5

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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

No. 94-7096.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 19, 1995
Decided: February 17, 1995

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge. (CA-94-745-2)

Ronald E. Davis, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, 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. Davis v. Angelone, No. CA-94-745-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 20, 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