Filed: May 31, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-40834 Summary Calendar _ AARON BERNARD WOODS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GARY JOHNSON, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, Respondent-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 5:94-CV-181 - - - - - - - - - - May 16, 1996 Before GARWOOD, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Aaron Bernard Woods appeals fro
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-40834 Summary Calendar _ AARON BERNARD WOODS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GARY JOHNSON, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, Respondent-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 5:94-CV-181 - - - - - - - - - - May 16, 1996 Before GARWOOD, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Aaron Bernard Woods appeals from..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-40834
Summary Calendar
__________________
AARON BERNARD WOODS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
GARY JOHNSON, Director, Texas
Department of Criminal Justice,
Institutional Division,
Respondent-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:94-CV-181
- - - - - - - - - -
May 16, 1996
Before GARWOOD, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Aaron Bernard Woods appeals from the district court's
dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 petition as an abuse of the
writ. Woods argues that at the time he filed his first federal
habeas petition, he was unaware of his instant claim that his
conviction was invalid because the jury failed to make an
affirmative finding that he used or exhibited a deadly weapon in
connection with the offense of aggravated robbery. We have
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-40834
-2-
reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED for
essentially the reasons stated by the district court.
AFFIRMED.