Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Lowery v. Corcoran, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Eddie Eugene Lowery of the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny Lowery's petition. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its opinion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-07-24 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-6574

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Eddie Eugene Lowery of the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny Lowery's petition. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    1 views2 pages

    Lowery v. Corcoran, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Eddie Eugene Lowery of the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny Lowery's petition. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 97-6574

    EDDIE EUGENE LOWERY,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    THOMAS CORCORAN, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
    THE STATE OF MARYLAND,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-963483-MJG)
    Submitted:

    July 10, 1997

    Decided:

    July 24, 1997

    Before RUSSELL, HALL, and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges.


    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Eddie Eugene Lowery, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,
    Attorney General, David Jonathan Taube, Assistant Attorney General,
    Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND,
    Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying
    relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2254 (West 1994 &
    Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's
    opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district
    court. Lowery v. Corcoran, No. CA-96-3483-MJG (D. Md. Apr. 16,
    1997). 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

    You might also like