Filed: Oct. 08, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7861 TYWON W. BRISCOE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus BUCKINGHAM CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-00-1080-AM) Submitted: September 30, 2002 Decided: October 8, 2002 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam op
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7861 TYWON W. BRISCOE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus BUCKINGHAM CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-00-1080-AM) Submitted: September 30, 2002 Decided: October 8, 2002 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7861 TYWON W. BRISCOE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus BUCKINGHAM CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-00-1080-AM) Submitted: September 30, 2002 Decided: October 8, 2002 Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tywon W. Briscoe, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Bain Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Tywon W. Briscoe seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and conclude on the reasoning of the district court that Briscoe has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Briscoe v. Buckingham Corr. Ctr., No. CA-00-1080-AM (E.D. Va. Sept. 27, 2001). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (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