Public-domain · open source

21 F.3d 424

Docket No. 93-6900.

Billy Richard Sessoms v. State of North Carolina

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Jan. 11, 1994. Decided April 21, 1994.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1994-04-21

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Joseph Skilken & Co. v. City of Toledo · Proffitt v. United States · Oliver S. Travers, Jr. Mary J. Travers v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Leonard O. Gerber Pauline K. Gerber v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Mark A. Abeshouse v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, William H. Schaeffer Francis D. Schaeffer v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Barry M. Pachino Judith Pachino v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Apparel Associates v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Donovan M. Hamm, Jr. Linda Hamm v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Frances D. Schaefer v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, William H. Schaefer v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Arthur T. Ward Dorothy M. Ward v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Sidney Zulver Doris Zulver v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Julius Zulver Selma Zulver v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Dennis W. Townsend Susan A. Townsend v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Townsend & Company, Incorporated & Subsidiary v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Hanan Sibel Carole Sibel v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Murray I. Resnick Ellen M. Resnick v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, William Z. Fox Myra L. Fox v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, David Fox Sheila F. Fox v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Jack L. Baylin Gail B. Baylin v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, David B. Hoffberger Janet S. Hoffberger v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, James W. Shaw Barbara G. Shaw v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, David J. Quigley Mary Lou Quigley v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, David L. Seagren, Individually and as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Dorothy P. Seagren Estate of Dorothy P. Seagren v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Albert E. Thompson, Jr. Nancy L. Thompson v. Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1994-04-21

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.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-92-750)

Billy Richard Sessoms, appellant Pro Se.

Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Office of the Atty. Gen. of North Carolina, Raleigh, NC, for appellee.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before HALL, WILKINSON, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. 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 affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. Sessoms v. North Carolina, No. CA-92-750 (E.D.N.C. July 7, 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.

AFFIRMED.

Although the district court did not specifically address Appellant's claims that his counsel was ineffective for failing to effectively represent him and file an appeal despite his request, his claims are meritless. The first claim is conclusory and does not raise a constitutional issue. Proffitt v. United States, 549 F.2d 910, 912 (4th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1076 (1977). The second claim is meritless because appellant did not have a right to appeal his guilty plea. N.C. Gen.Stat. Sec. 15A-1444(a)(1) (1988)