Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Phillips v. Trent, 94-6576 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-6576 Visitors: 21
Filed: Jan. 31, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 94-6576 LEONARD PHILLIPS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus GEORGE TRENT, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CA-94-15-2) Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: January 31, 1996 Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismi
More
                             UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



                             No. 94-6576



LEONARD PHILLIPS,

                                              Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

GEORGE TRENT, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary,

                                               Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis-
trict of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief
District Judge. (CA-94-15-2)


Submitted:   January 18, 1996              Decided:   January 31, 1996


Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Leonard Phillips, Appellant Pro Se.     Jacquelyn Irwin Custer,
Darrell V. McGraw, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. Phillips
v. Trent, No. CA-94-15-2 (S.D.W. Va. May 2, 1994). We dispense with

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-

ly 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