Filed: May 18, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6008 HARRY JAMES DOMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD ANGELONE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-97-624-R) Submitted: March 17, 1998 Decided: May 18, 1998 Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harry James Doman, Appellant Pro Se. Stev
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6008 HARRY JAMES DOMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD ANGELONE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-97-624-R) Submitted: March 17, 1998 Decided: May 18, 1998 Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harry James Doman, Appellant Pro Se. Steve..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6008 HARRY JAMES DOMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD ANGELONE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-97-624-R) Submitted: March 17, 1998 Decided: May 18, 1998 Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harry James Doman, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Andrew Witmer, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 appeals the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 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 appealabil- ity and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Doman v. Angelone, No. CA-97-624-R (W.D. Va. Dec. 15, 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