Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • McKenzie v. SC Dept Corr, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Richard Lee McKenzie of the denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny McKenzie's petition. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its prior opinion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-11-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-6501

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Richard Lee McKenzie of the denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny McKenzie's petition. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its prior opinion.

    Copyright:

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

    McKenzie v. SC Dept Corr, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Richard Lee McKenzie of the denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court record and found no reversible error in the district court's acceptance of the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny McKenzie's petition. The Fourth Circuit therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its prior opinion.

    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. 97-6501

    RICHARD LEE MCKENZIE,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Greenville. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (CA-96-2578-6-6AK)
    Submitted:

    October 23, 1997

    Decided:

    November 14, 1997

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


    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Richard Lee McKenzie, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief
    Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South 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.A. 2254 (West 1994 &
    Supp. 1997). 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 appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district
    court. McKenzie v. South Carolina Dep't of Corr., No. CA-96-2578-66AK (D.S.C. Mar. 3, 1997). 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