Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Spears v. Freeman, 97-7135 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-7135 Visitors: 33
Filed: May 26, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7135 DAVID EUGENE SPEARS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus FRANKLIN FREEMAN; TOM C. MARTIN, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-97-161-5-BR) Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: May 26, 1998 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished pe
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7135 DAVID EUGENE SPEARS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus FRANKLIN FREEMAN; TOM C. MARTIN, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-97-161-5-BR) Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: May 26, 1998 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Eugene Spears, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting in part the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certif- icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Spears v. Freeman, No. CA-97-161-5-BR (E.D.N.C. July 29, 1997). 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
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