Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Morris v. State of South, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Charles L. Morris, Jr. regarding the denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The district court had accepted the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny Morris's petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals denied Morris a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its prior opinion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-04-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-6832

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Charles L. Morris, Jr. regarding the denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The district court had accepted the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny Morris's petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals denied Morris a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its prior opinion.

    Copyright:

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

    Morris v. State of South, 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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Charles L. Morris, Jr. regarding the denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The district court had accepted the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny Morris's petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals denied Morris a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its prior 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. 96-6832

    CHARLES L. MORRIS, JR.,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON,
    Attorney General of the State of South
    Carolina,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Charleston. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (CA-95-3289-2-6AJ)
    Submitted:

    March 27, 1997

    Decided:

    April 2, 1997

    Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.


    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Charles L. Morris, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka,
    Chief Deputy Attorney General, Lauri J. Soles, 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:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on
    his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104132, 110 Stat. 1214. 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. Morris v. South Carolina, No. CA-95-3289-2-6AJ
    (D.S.C. Apr. 25, 1996). 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