Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Pearson v. State of North Carl, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    Richard Pearson appealed the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible errors. The appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Pearson was not entitled to habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-12-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-6572

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Richard Pearson appealed the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible errors. The appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Pearson was not entitled to habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Pearson v. State of North Carl, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Richard Pearson appealed the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible errors. The appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Pearson was not entitled to habeas corpus relief. The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral arguments, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 96-6572

    RICHARD N. PEARSON,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; RICK JACKSON,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District
    Judge. (CA-94-896-5-F)
    Submitted:

    November 21, 1996

    Decided:

    December 3, 1996

    Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.


    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Richard N. Pearson, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,
    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North
    Carolina, for Appellees.
    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 petition filed under 28 U.S.C. 2254 (1994), amended
    by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L.
    No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the
    district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
    we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on
    the reasoning of the district court. Pearson v. North Carolina,
    No. CA-94-896-5-F (E.D.N.C. Apr. 8, 1996). 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