Filed: Jul. 31, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6369 JAMES CLARK, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-00-406-AM) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: July 31, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Clark, Appellant Pr
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6369 JAMES CLARK, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-00-406-AM) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: July 31, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Clark, Appellant Pro..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6369 JAMES CLARK, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-00-406-AM) Submitted: July 26, 2001 Decided: July 31, 2001 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Clark, Appellant Pro Se. Marla Graff Decker, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James Clark appeals 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 district court’s opin- ion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certif- icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Clark v. Director, Dep’t of Corr., No. CA-00- 406-AM (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 12, 2001; entered Feb. 14, 2001). 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