Filed: Jan. 02, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-6637 JAMES ANTHONY BUTLER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; T. TRAVIS MEDLOCK, the Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-2466-6-21AK) Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 2, 1996 Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDEN
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-6637 JAMES ANTHONY BUTLER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; T. TRAVIS MEDLOCK, the Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-2466-6-21AK) Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 2, 1996 Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENE..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-6637 JAMES ANTHONY BUTLER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; T. TRAVIS MEDLOCK, the Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-2466-6-21AK) Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 2, 1996 Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Anthony Butler, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. Butler v. State of South Carolina, No. CA-94-2466-6-21AK (D.S.C. Apr. 3, 1995). 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