Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Ferguson v. Duncil, 94-6550 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-6550 Visitors: 19
Filed: Aug. 02, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 94-6550 ERNEST G. FERGUSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIAM C. DUNCIL, Warden, Huttonsville Cor- rectional Center, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Huntington. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CA-91-1170) Submitted: December 5, 1995 Decided: August 2, 1996 Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, and MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judge
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 94-6550 ERNEST G. FERGUSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIAM C. DUNCIL, Warden, Huttonsville Cor- rectional Center, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Huntington. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CA-91-1170) Submitted: December 5, 1995 Decided: August 2, 1996 Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, and MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Harless, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. William Trask Douglass, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recom- mendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Ferguson v. Duncil, No. CA-91-1170 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 31, 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 2
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