Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Miller v. Rushton, 02-6880 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-6880 Visitors: 41
Filed: Sep. 10, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6880 JOHN M. MILLER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus COLIE RUSHTON, Warden of McCormick Correctional Institution; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-02-1212-6-19AK) Submitted: September 5, 2002 Decided: September 10, 2002 Before MOTZ, KI
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6880 JOHN M. MILLER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus COLIE RUSHTON, Warden of McCormick Correctional Institution; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-02-1212-6-19AK) Submitted: September 5, 2002 Decided: September 10, 2002 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John M. Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: John M. Miller 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 accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and conclude on the reasoning of the district court that Miller has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Miller v. Rushton, No. CA-02-1212-6-19AK (D.S.C. May 23, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
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