Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Gore v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The court dismissed an appeal from Joseph Ronald Gore, who had filed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction. The district court had denied relief, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying a certificate of probable cause to appeal. The court also dismissed the appeal, relying on the reasoning of the district court in its previous denial of Gore's habeas petition.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-09-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-6481

    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 summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The court dismissed an appeal from Joseph Ronald Gore, who had filed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction. The district court had denied relief, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying a certificate of probable cause to appeal. The court also dismissed the appeal, relying on the reasoning of the district court in its previous denial of Gore's habeas petition.

    Copyright:

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

    Gore v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The court dismissed an appeal from Joseph Ronald Gore, who had filed a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction. The district court had denied relief, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying a certificate of probable cause to appeal. The court also dismissed the appeal, relying on the reasoning of the district court in its previous denial of Gore's habeas petition.

    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. 96-6481

    JOSEPH RONALD GORE,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District
    Judge. (CA-95-769)
    Submitted:

    September 5, 1996

    Decided:

    September 17, 1996

    Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Joseph Ronald Gore, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr., OFFICE
    OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    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 28 U.S.C. 2254 (1988), amended by Antiterrorism
    and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110
    Stat. 1214, petition. We have reviewed the record and the district
    court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate
    judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal; to the extent that a certificate
    of appealability is required, we deny such a certificate. We dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Gore v.
    Angelone, No. CA-95-769 (E.D. Va. Mar. 11, 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