Filed: May 18, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7396 HENRY SINGLETARY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus LAURIE F. BESSINGER, Warden; CHARLES M. CONDON, 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. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-95-3232-3-18BC) Submitted: April 14, 1998 Decided: May 18, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HALL, S
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7396 HENRY SINGLETARY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus LAURIE F. BESSINGER, Warden; CHARLES M. CONDON, 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. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-95-3232-3-18BC) Submitted: April 14, 1998 Decided: May 18, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Se..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7396
HENRY SINGLETARY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
LAURIE F. BESSINGER, Warden; CHARLES M.
CONDON, 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. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(CA-95-3232-3-18BC)
Submitted: April 14, 1998 Decided: May 18, 1998
Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Henry Singletary, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994) (current
version at 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). 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 certificate of probable cause to ap-
peal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.
Singletary v. Bessinger, No. CA-95-3232-3-18BC (D.S.C. Aug. 9,
1996). See Lindh v. Murphy,
521 U.S. ___,
65 U.S.L.W. 4557 (U.S.
June 23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). We dispense with oral argument be-
cause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in
the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
2