Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Johnson v. United States, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of Tony Orlando Johnson v. United States of America et al. The Fourth Circuit dismissed Johnson's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254. In dismissing the appeal, the Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation and relied on the reasoning provided by the district court in its November 18, 1998 opinion denying Johnson relief.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-10-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 98-7780

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of Tony Orlando Johnson v. United States of America et al. The Fourth Circuit dismissed Johnson's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254. In dismissing the appeal, the Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation and relied on the reasoning provided by the district court in its November 18, 1998 opinion denying Johnson relief.

    Copyright:

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

    Johnson v. United States, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of Tony Orlando Johnson v. United States of America et al. The Fourth Circuit dismissed Johnson's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254. In dismissing the appeal, the Fourth Circuit found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation and relied on the reasoning provided by the district court in its November 18, 1998 opinion denying Johnson relief.

    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. 98-7780

    TONY ORLANDO JOHNSON,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL; M. J. MCDADE, Superintendent
    Harnett Correctional Center,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District
    Judge. (CA-97-1282-1)

    Submitted:

    February 23, 1999

    Decided:

    October 5, 1999

    Before HAMILTON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    James A. Crouch, MANNING & CROUCH, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellant. 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:
    Tony

    Orlando

    Johnson

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2254 (West


    1994 & Supp. 1998).

    We have reviewed the record and the district

    courts opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate


    judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of
    the district court. See Johnson v. United States, No. CA-97-1282-1
    (M.D.N.C. Nov. 18, 1998).

    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