Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Gaynor v. Powell, 00-7576 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-7576 Visitors: 10
Filed: Mar. 12, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7576 CHRISTOPHER YVES GAYNOR, Petitioner - Appellant, versus H. R. POWELL, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-1622-A) Submitted: February 22, 2001 Decided: March 12, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7576 CHRISTOPHER YVES GAYNOR, Petitioner - Appellant, versus H. R. POWELL, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior Dis- trict Judge. (CA-99-1622-A) Submitted: February 22, 2001 Decided: March 12, 2001 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher Yves Gaynor, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assis- tant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Christopher Yves Gaynor seeks to appeal the district court’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 dis- trict court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Gaynor v. Powell, No. CA-99- 1622-A (E.D. Va. Sept. 29, 2000). We deny Gaynor’s motions for an evidentiary hearing and for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade- quately 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