Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Harrison v. Nulty, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    James Harrison filed a motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to appeal the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the district court's decision and found no reversible errors. The appeals court denied Harrison's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary because the case details were clear based on the court filings.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-08-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-7167

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    James Harrison filed a motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to appeal the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the district court's decision and found no reversible errors. The appeals court denied Harrison's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary because the case details were clear based on the court filings.

    Copyright:

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

    Harrison v. Nulty, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    James Harrison filed a motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 to appeal the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the district court's decision and found no reversible errors. The appeals court denied Harrison's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning. The appeals court decided oral arguments were not necessary because the case details were clear based on the court filings.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 97-7167

    JAMES E. HARRISON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    C. T. NULTY,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (CA-97-575-AM)

    Submitted:

    August 13, 1998

    Decided:

    August 28, 1998

    Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges and HALL, Senior Circuit
    Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    James E. Harrison, Appellant Pro Se. Linwood Theodore Wells, Jr.,
    Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    James E. Harrison seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.
    1998). 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. Harrison v. Nulty, No. CA-97-575-AM (E.D. Va. July 29,
    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