Donald Burton v. State of North Carolina Attorney General of North Carolina

54 F.3d 772, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17404, 1995 WL 298108
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 17, 1995
Docket94-7070
StatusPublished

This text of 54 F.3d 772 (Donald Burton v. State of North Carolina Attorney General of North Carolina) 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
Donald Burton v. State of North Carolina Attorney General of North Carolina, 54 F.3d 772, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17404, 1995 WL 298108 (4th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

54 F.3d 772
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Donald BURTON, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
STATE of North Carolina; Attorney General of North
Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 94-7070.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 20, 1995.
Decided May 17, 1995.

Irving L. Joyner, NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL UNIVERSITY, Durham, NC, for appellant. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, for appellees.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's order* denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Burton v. North Carolina, No. CA-93-351 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 15, 1994). 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

*

The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(c) (1988)

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 F.3d 772, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17404, 1995 WL 298108, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donald-burton-v-state-of-north-carolina-attorney-g-ca4-1995.