Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 23 views

    Richardson v. Director Dept Corr, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion dismissing Harold P. Richardson's appeal of a magistrate judge's order denying relief on his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the magistrate judge's reasoning for denying the petition. As a result, the court denied Richardson a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the magistrate judge's prior opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Richardson v. Director Dept Corr, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    23 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion dismissing Harold P. Richardson's appeal of a magistrate judge's order denying relief on his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the magistrate judge's reasoning for denying the petition. As a result, the court denied Richardson a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the magistrate judge's prior opinion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-06-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-6217

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion dismissing Harold P. Richardson's appeal of a magistrate judge's order denying relief on his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the magistrate judge's reasoning for denying the petition. As a result, the court denied Richardson a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the magistrate judge's prior opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    23 views2 pages

    Richardson v. Director Dept Corr, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion dismissing Harold P. Richardson's appeal of a magistrate judge's order denying relief on his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the magistrate judge's reasoning for denying the petition. As a result, the court denied Richardson a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the magistrate judge's prior opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 01-6217

    HAROLD P. RICHARDSON,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate Judge.
    (CA-00-89)

    Submitted:

    June 21, 2001

    Decided:

    June 28, 2001

    Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Harold P. Richardson, 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:
    Harold P. Richardson seeks to appeal the magistrate judges
    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

    magistrate judges opinion and find no reversible error.

    Accord-

    ingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the


    appeal on the reasoning of the magistrate judge.

    Richardson v.

    Director, Dept of Corr., No. CA-00-89 (E.D. Va. Dec. 18, 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

    The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge


    pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c) (1994).
    2

    You might also like