Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

7 F.3d 226

Docket Nos. 93-6239, 93-6240.

Taylor v. Murray D

Full caption · 2 consolidated cases

  • Percy D. TAYLOR, Petitioner-v.Edward MURRAY, Respondent-Appellee. Percy D
  • Taylor, Petitioner-v.Edward Murray, Respondent-

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted: August 20, 1993. Decided: October 13, 1993.

This page is marked noindex.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1993-10-13

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

Relies on Francis Ian Tonner v. Edward W. Murray, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1993-10-13

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-92-587, CA-92-588)

Percy D. Taylor, Appellant Pro Se.

Robert B. Condon, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

OPINION

¶1

Percy D. Taylor appeals from the district court's orders refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988). Our review of the records and the district court's opinions discloses that these appeals are without merit. However, we grant certificates of probable cause in order to alter the district court's final orders to reflect that the dismissals of Taylor's habeas corpus petitions are without prejudice, subject to Taylor's subsequent exhaustion of available state remedies. With those amendments, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.* Taylor v. Murray, Nos. CA-92-587, CA-92-588 (E.D. Va. Feb. 5, 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 AS MODIFIED

*

We also grant Taylor's "Motion for the Application of FRAP Rules."

/7/f3d/226 · .json · Public domain