Burnette v. United States

Fourth Circuit

Burnette v. United States

311 F. App'x 651

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 23, 2009

DocketNo. 08-7202

StatusPublished

This text of 311 F. App'x 651 (Burnette v. United States) 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

Burnette v. United States, 311 F. App'x 651 (4th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Steven Aubrey Burnette, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his self-styled “Writ of Habeas Corpus.” We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Burnette’s application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny as unnecessary his request for a certificate of appealability, and affirm the district court’s order. See Burnette v. United States, No. 7:08-ev-00366-jcT-mfu, 2008 WL 2516605 (W.D.Va. June 23, 2008). 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.

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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Steven Aubrey Burnette, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his self-styled “Writ of Habeas Corpus.” We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Burnette’s application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny as unnecessary his request for a certificate of appealability, and affirm the district court’s order. See Burnette v. United States, No. 7:08-ev-00366-jcT-mfu, 2008 WL 2516605 (W.D.Va. June 23, 2008). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

311 F. App'x 651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burnette-v-united-states-ca4-2009.