Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    Mabine v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Ronald Mabine filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 appealing the district court's denial of relief. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error. The court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Mabine was not entitled to relief. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Mabine v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Ronald Mabine filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 appealing the district court's denial of relief. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error. The court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Mabine was not entitled to relief. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-01-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 98-6120

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Ronald Mabine filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 appealing the district court's denial of relief. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error. The court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Mabine was not entitled to relief. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    3 views2 pages

    Mabine v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Ronald Mabine filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 appealing the district court's denial of relief. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error. The court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Mabine was not entitled to relief. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 98-6120

    RONALD L. MABINE,
    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 Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-97-151-AM)

    Submitted:

    December 17, 1998

    Decided:

    January 5, 1999

    Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Ronald L. Mabine, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Bain Smith, Assistant
    Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Ronald L. Mabine appeals the district courts order denying
    relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2254 (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. See Mabine v. Angelone, No. CA-97-151-AM
    (E.D.Va. Dec. 16, 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