Filed: Dec. 19, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7168 ERNEST RICHARD TATUM, Petitioner - Appellant, versus NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL; MICKEY RAY, Warden, F.C.I. Estill, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. William L. Osteen, Sr., District Judge. (CA-96-36-6) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 19, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Dis
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7168 ERNEST RICHARD TATUM, Petitioner - Appellant, versus NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL; MICKEY RAY, Warden, F.C.I. Estill, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. William L. Osteen, Sr., District Judge. (CA-96-36-6) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 19, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Dism..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7168 ERNEST RICHARD TATUM, Petitioner - Appellant, versus NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL; MICKEY RAY, Warden, F.C.I. Estill, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. William L. Osteen, Sr., District Judge. (CA-96-36-6) Submitted: December 12, 1996 Decided: December 19, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ernest Richard Tatum, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe Delforge, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 (1994), amended by Anti- terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104- 132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certifi- cate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Tatum v. North Carolina Attorney Gen., No. CA- 96-36-6 (M.D.N.C. July 10, 1996). 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 deci- sional process. DISMISSED 2