Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Peter Burke, Sr. v. Van F. Barnes, 14 F.3d 593, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal from Peter Burke seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court had denied Burke's habeas petition, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Fourth Circuit found the appeal was without merit based on its review of the record and district court opinion. The Fourth Circuit also noted that Burke was not entitled to be informed of the identity of an informant in his case because the informant was a mere tipster whose identity would not have been helpful to Burke's defense.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1993-12-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 14 F.3d 593 Docket: 93-6316

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal from Peter Burke seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court had denied Burke's habeas petition, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Fourth Circuit found the appeal was without merit based on its review of the record and district court opinion. The Fourth Circuit also noted that Burke was not entitled to be informed of the identity of an informant in his case because the informant was a mere tipster whose identity would not have been helpful to Burke's defense.

    Copyright:

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

    Peter Burke, Sr. v. Van F. Barnes, 14 F.3d 593, 4th Cir. (1993)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal from Peter Burke seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court had denied Burke's habeas petition, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Fourth Circuit found the appeal was without merit based on its review of the record and district court opinion. The Fourth Circuit also noted that Burke was not entitled to be informed of the identity of an informant in his case because the informant was a mere tipster whose identity would not have been helpful to Burke's defense.

    Copyright:

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

    14 F.

    3d 593

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    Peter BURKE, Sr., Petitioner-Appellant,
    v.
    Van F. BARNES, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 93-6316.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Aug. 16, 1993.
    Decided Dec. 23, 1993.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
    North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    Peter Burke, Sr., appellant pro se.
    Clarence Joe DelForge, III, for appellee.
    E.D.N.C.
    DISMISSED.
    Before WILKINSON and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE,
    Senior Circuit Judge.
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:

    Peter Burke, Sr., seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas
    corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988). Our review of the record
    and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate
    judge discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny a

    certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning
    of the district court.* Burke v. Barnes, No. CA-92-398-HC-F (E.D.N.C. Mar.
    19, 1993). 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.
    2

    DISMISSED.

    Burke was not entitled to be informed of the identity of the informant. On the
    facts of this case, the informant was a"mere tipster" and would not have been
    helpful to the defense. United States v. Mabry, 953 F.2d 127 (4th Cir.1991),
    cert. denied, 60 U.S.L.W. 3780 (U.S.1992)

    You might also like