Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Walker v. Angelone, 00-6686 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-6686 Visitors: 83
Filed: Nov. 01, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6686 MICHAEL ANTHONY WALKER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Depart- ment of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-00-544-AM) Submitted: October 17, 2000 Decided: November 1, 2000 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpubli
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6686 MICHAEL ANTHONY WALKER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Depart- ment of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-00-544-AM) Submitted: October 17, 2000 Decided: November 1, 2000 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Anthony Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Michael Anthony Walker appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000) and his motion seeking to alter or amend the judgment. 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 Walker v. Angelone, No. CA- 00-544-AM (E.D. Va. filed Apr. 3, entered Apr. 4, 2000; filed May 1, entered May 2, 2000). 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