Baker v. Johnson

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 31, 2003
Docket03-6123
StatusUnpublished

This text of Baker v. Johnson (Baker v. Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Baker v. Johnson, (4th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6123

BERNARD M. BAKER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-02-492-2)

Submitted: March 20, 2003 Decided: March 31, 2003

Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bernard K. Baker, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Vorhis, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Bernard M. Baker, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the

district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the

magistrate judge construing Baker’s petition as arising under 28

U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), and denying relief. We have independently

reviewed the record and conclude that Baker has not made a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See

Miller-El v. Cockrell, U.S. , 2003 WL 431659, at *10 (U.S.

Feb. 25, 2003) (No. 01-7662). Accordingly, we deny a certificate

of appealability, deny the motion for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000).

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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Power to grant writ
28 U.S.C. § 2241
Appeal
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Baker v. Johnson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baker-v-johnson-ca4-2003.