Covington v. Beck
This text of Covington v. Beck (Covington v. Beck) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6870
JIMMY D. COVINGTON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
THEODIS BECK,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 02-6921
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-968-1)
Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 6, 2002 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jimmy D. Covington, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Wallace-Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Jimmy D. Covington seeks to appeal the district court’s orders
denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West
1994 & Supp. 2002). We have reviewed the record and the district
court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate
judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a
certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeals on the
reasoning of the district court. Covington v. Beck, No. CA-01-968-
1 (M.D.N.C. filed May 20, 2002 & entered May 21, 2002; June 3,
2002). 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Covington v. Beck, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/covington-v-beck-ca4-2002.