Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Cooper v. Director Dept Corr, 97-7128 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-7128 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jul. 24, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7128 CHARLES COOPER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-96-1354-AM) Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: July 24, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7128 CHARLES COOPER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-96-1354-AM) Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: July 24, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a cer- tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Cooper v. Director, Dep’t of Corr., No. CA- 96-1354-AM (E.D. Va. June 11, 1997). We deny Appellant’s motion for appointment of counsel and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials 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