Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Moore v. Beck, 00-7638 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-7638 Visitors: 29
Filed: May 01, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7638 KORANE Q. MOORE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THEODIS BECK; STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, 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-00-575-1) Submitted: April 13, 2001 Decided: May 1, 2001 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Korane Q. Mo
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7638 KORANE Q. MOORE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THEODIS BECK; STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, 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-00-575-1) Submitted: April 13, 2001 Decided: May 1, 2001 Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Korane Q. Moore, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Korane Q. Moore 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 magis- trate judge’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Moore’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Moore v. Beck, No. CA-00-575-1 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 3, 2000). We also deny Moore’s motions for discovery and appointment of counsel. We dis- pense 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 the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (1994). 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