Almond v. Baskerville

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided October 8, 2002

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2002-10-08

Cited by 1 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2003

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 636

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion · Decided 2002-10-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Orlando David Amond seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge’s opinion and conclude on the reasoning of the magistrate judge that Amond has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. * See Almond v. Baskerville, No. CA-01-230-3 (E.D.Va. May 17, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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.

¶3 The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).