Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Shepard v. Harrison, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Rickey James Shepard of the district court's denial of his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 record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning of the district court order dated July 26, 2001.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-10-30 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-7427

    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    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Rickey James Shepard of the district court's denial of his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 record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning of the district court order dated July 26, 2001.

    Copyright:

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

    Shepard v. Harrison, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Rickey James Shepard of the district court's denial of his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 record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning of the district court order dated July 26, 2001.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 01-7427

    RICKEY JAMES SHEPARD,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    RICKIE HARRISON, Warden of Kershaw Correctional Institution; CHARLES M. CONDON,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.
    (CA-00-2794-7-19BG)

    Submitted:

    October 18, 2001

    Decided:

    October 30, 2001

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


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Rickey James Shepard, Appellant Pro Se.
    Derrick K. McFarland,
    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South
    Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Rickey James Shepard appeals the district courts order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2254 (West
    1994 & Supp. 2001).

    We have reviewed the record and the district

    courts opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate


    judge and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we deny a cer-

    tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning


    of the district court.

    See Shepard v. Harrison, No. CA-00-2794-7-

    19BG (D.S.C. July 26, 2001).

    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