Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 16 views

    Roshto v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Michael Roshto filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court denied relief, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying a certificate of appealability and dismissing the appeal based on the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit also denied Roshto's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Roshto v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    16 views2 pages
    Michael Roshto filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court denied relief, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying a certificate of appealability and dismissing the appeal based on the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit also denied Roshto's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-08-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-7289

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Michael Roshto filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court denied relief, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying a certificate of appealability and dismissing the appeal based on the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit also denied Roshto's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Roshto v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Michael Roshto filed a petition under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court denied relief, accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying a certificate of appealability and dismissing the appeal based on the district court's reasoning. The Fourth Circuit also denied Roshto's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 97-7289

    MICHAEL H. ROSHTO,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia
    Department of Corrections,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge.
    (CA-96-1201-2)

    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.


    Michael H. Roshto, Appellant Pro Se. Collin Jefferson Hite, SANDS,
    ANDERSON, MARKS & MILLER, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant 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
    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. Roshto v. Angelone, No. CA-96-1201-2 (E.D. Va. Aug. 20,
    1997). We deny Appellants motion for leave to proceed in forma
    pauperis on appeal. 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