Filed: Dec. 10, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6652 COREY T. SNEED, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RICK JACKSON, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:06-hc-02099-BO) Submitted: November 6, 2007 Decided: December 10, 2007 Before TRAXLER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Corey T
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6652 COREY T. SNEED, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RICK JACKSON, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:06-hc-02099-BO) Submitted: November 6, 2007 Decided: December 10, 2007 Before TRAXLER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Corey T...
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6652 COREY T. SNEED, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RICK JACKSON, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:06-hc-02099-BO) Submitted: November 6, 2007 Decided: December 10, 2007 Before TRAXLER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Corey T. Sneed, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Corey T. Sneed appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to resubmit his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sneed v. Jackson, No. 5:06-hc-02099-BO (E.D.N.C. Apr. 10, 2007). 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. AFFIRMED - 2 -
