Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6 views

    Harrington v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Donnie Harrington's appeal of a district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. As such, the Court of Appeals denied Harrington's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Harrington v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Donnie Harrington's appeal of a district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. As such, the Court of Appeals denied Harrington's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2000-10-06 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 00-6548

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Donnie Harrington's appeal of a district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. As such, the Court of Appeals denied Harrington's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Harrington v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Donnie Harrington's appeal of a district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning. As such, the Court of Appeals denied Harrington's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    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. 00-6548

    DONNIE HARRINGTON,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    RONALD J. ANGELONE,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (CA-00-372-AM)

    Submitted:

    September 26, 2000

    Decided:

    October 6, 2000

    Before LUTTIG and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Donnie Harrington, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Donnie Harrington seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2254 (West
    1994 & Supp. 2000).

    We have reviewed the record and the district

    courts opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny


    a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

    See Harrington v. Angelone, No. CA-

    00-372-AM (E.D. Va. Mar. 13, 2000). 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