Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2 views

    Carter v. Evans, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of David L. Carter's motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2241 and denial of his motion for a certificate of appealability. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court record and orders and affirmed the lower court's reasoning for denying the motions without requiring oral arguments.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Carter v. Evans, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of David L. Carter's motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2241 and denial of his motion for a certificate of appealability. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court record and orders and affirmed the lower court's reasoning for denying the motions without requiring oral arguments.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-02-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-7284

    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    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of David L. Carter's motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2241 and denial of his motion for a certificate of appealability. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court record and orders and affirmed the lower court's reasoning for denying the motions without requiring oral arguments.

    Copyright:

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

    Carter v. Evans, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of David L. Carter's motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2241 and denial of his motion for a certificate of appealability. The Fourth Circuit reviewed the district court record and orders and affirmed the lower court's reasoning for denying the motions without requiring oral arguments.

    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. 03-7284

    DAVID L. CARTER,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    ORINDA EVANS; WILLIAM HARPER; KATHLEEN SWAYER;
    ARTHUR BEELER; THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-02-492-5-HC-BO)

    Submitted: February 12, 2004

    Decided:

    February 20, 2004

    Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    David L. Carter, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    David L. Carter appeals district court orders denying his
    motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2241 (2000) and denying his motion
    for a certificate of appealability.

    We have reviewed the record

    and the district court orders and affirm on the reasoning of the
    district

    court.

    See

    Carter

    v.

    Evans,

    No.

    CA-02-492-5-HC-BO

    (E.D.N.C. July 22, 2002 & filed Aug. 1, 2003; entered Aug. 5,
    2003).

    We grant Carters motion to proceed on appeal in forma

    pauperis.

    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.

    AFFIRMED

    - 2 -

    You might also like