Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Phillips v. Trent, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    Leonard Phillips appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit denied Phillips' request for a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for denying habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-01-31 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 94-6576

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Leonard Phillips appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit denied Phillips' request for a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for denying habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Phillips v. Trent, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Leonard Phillips appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The Fourth Circuit denied Phillips' request for a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning for denying habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    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. 94-6576

    LEONARD PHILLIPS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    GEORGE TRENT, Warden, West Virginia Penitentiary,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-94-15-2)
    Submitted:

    January 18, 1996

    Decided:

    January 31, 1996

    Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Leonard Phillips, Appellant Pro Se.
    Jacquelyn Irwin Custer,
    Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST
    VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
    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 28 U.S.C. 2254 (1988) petition. 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 probable cause to appeal and
    dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Phillips
    v. Trent, No. CA-94-15-2 (S.D.W. Va. May 2, 1994). 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