Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

914 F.2d 1490

Docket No. 90-6583.

Crowell v. Williams

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Aug. 27, 1990. Decided Sept. 25, 1990.

This page is marked noindex.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1990-09-26

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1999

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

Relies on Claypool v. Boyd

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1990-09-26

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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 Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, United States Magistrate. (C/A No. 88-790-R).

Anthony Crowell, appellant pro se.

Linwood Theodore Wells, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Va., for appellees.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

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

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Anthony Crowell seeks to appeal the magistrate's* order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. Our review of the record and the magistrate's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the magistrate. Crowell v. Williams, C/A No. 88-790-R (E.D.Va. Apr. 17, 1990). 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

*

The magistrate exercised jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(c)

/914/f2d/1490 · .json · Public domain