Filed: Dec. 22, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7316 ERNIE CLIFFORD WILLIAMS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus A. D. ROBINSON, Warden; MARK L. EARLEY, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-99-500-7) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 22, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Dismissed
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7316 ERNIE CLIFFORD WILLIAMS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus A. D. ROBINSON, Warden; MARK L. EARLEY, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-99-500-7) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 22, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Dismissed ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7316 ERNIE CLIFFORD WILLIAMS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus A. D. ROBINSON, Warden; MARK L. EARLEY, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-99-500-7) Submitted: December 16, 1999 Decided: December 22, 1999 Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ernie Clifford Williams, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ernie Clifford Williams, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s final order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s memorandum opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeal- ability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Williams v. Robinson, No. CA-99-500-7 (W.D. Va. Sept. 15, 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