Dehoney v. Ozmint

178 F. App'x 276
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 3, 2006·No. Nos. 05-7534, 05-7535, 05-7536·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

PER CURIAM:

Michael F. Dehoney appeals the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and construing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2000) and dismissing the complaint and the order denying his motion to reconsider. We have reviewed the record and the district [277]*277court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Dehoney v. Ozmint, Nos. CA-04-21981-HMH-BHH; CA-04-22025-HMH-BHH; CA-04-22026-HMH-BMH (D.S.C. Aug. 10 & 29, 2005). 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

Dehoney v. Ozmint, 178 F. App'x 276 (4th Cir. 2006).

178 F. App'x 276 (Dehoney v. Ozmint) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related