Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Jack Alexander Gatewood v. Lonnie M. Saunders, Warden, 94-7298 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-7298 Visitors: 28
Filed: Mar. 20, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 50 F.3d 6 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Jack Alexander GATEWOOD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Lonnie M. SAUNDERS, Warden, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-7298. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: February 16, 1995 Decided: March 20, 1995 Appeal from the Unite
More

50 F.3d 6

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Jack Alexander GATEWOOD, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
Lonnie M. SAUNDERS, Warden, Defendant--Appellee.

No. 94-7298.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: February 16, 1995
Decided: March 20, 1995

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-94-817-AM)

Jack Alexander Gatewood, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Quentin Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before HAMILTON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, 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. Gatewood v. Saunders, No. CA-94-817-AM (E.D. Va. Oct. 7, 1994). Because there are no complex or substantial issues presented in this appeal, we deny Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel. 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