Filed: Jul. 15, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6403 CLAUDE REEDY, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-758-7) Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 15, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clau
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6403 CLAUDE REEDY, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-758-7) Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 15, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Claud..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6403 CLAUDE REEDY, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-758-7) Submitted: July 8, 1999 Decided: July 15, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Claude Reedy, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Claude Reedy, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1999). 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. See Reedy v. Director of Virginia Depart- ment of Corrections, No. CA-98-758-7 (W.D. Va. Feb. 24, 1999). 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