Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Campbell v. State of SC, 96-6580 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6580 Visitors: 23
Filed: Jan. 31, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6580 LAWRENCE W. CAMPBELL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-271-3-21BC) Submitted: January 23, 1997 Decided: January 31, 1997 Before RUSSELL, WILKINS, * and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismi
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6580 LAWRENCE W. CAMPBELL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-271-3-21BC) Submitted: January 23, 1997 Decided: January 31, 1997 Before RUSSELL, WILKINS, * and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lawrence W. Campbell, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). * Judge Wilkins did not participate in consideration of this case. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d). 2 PER CURIAM: Lawrence W. Campbell seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. July 1996, Pamplet 2). We have reviewed the rec- ord and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal; to the extent that a certificate of appealability is required, we deny such a certificate. We dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Campbell v. South Carolina, No. CA-95-271-3-21BC (D.S.C. Mar. 27, 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 decisional process. DISMISSED 3
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