Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Daniels v. McDade, 00-7413 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-7413 Visitors: 3
Filed: Dec. 20, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7413 WILLIE J. DANIELS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus MARTIN J. MCDADE, Superintendent of Harnett Correctional Institution; NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Paul Trevor Sharp, Magistrate Judge. (CA-00-230-1) Submitted: December 14, 2000 Decided: December 20, 2000 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and TR
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7413 WILLIE J. DANIELS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus MARTIN J. MCDADE, Superintendent of Harnett Correctional Institution; NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Paul Trevor Sharp, Magistrate Judge. (CA-00-230-1) Submitted: December 14, 2000 Decided: December 20, 2000 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Willie J. Daniels, Jr., 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Willie J. Daniels, Jr., seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000).* We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accord- ingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. See Daniels v. McDade, No. CA-00-230-1 (M.D.N.C. Sept. 26, 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 * The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(c) (West 1993 & Supp. 2000). 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