Edward B. Lunsford v. North Carolina Attorney General

Fourth Circuit

Edward B. Lunsford v. North Carolina Attorney General

59 F.3d 167, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23455, 1995 WL 373276

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 23, 1995

Docket95-6231

StatusPublished

This text of 59 F.3d 167 (Edward B. Lunsford v. North Carolina Attorney General) 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

Edward B. Lunsford v. North Carolina Attorney General, 59 F.3d 167, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23455, 1995 WL 373276 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

59 F.3d 167
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Edward B. LUNSFORD, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 95-6231.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 23, 1995.

Edward B. Lunsford, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Norwood League, Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, NC, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

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. Lunsford v. North Carolina Attorney General, No. CA-94-215-1 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 13, 1995). 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 disposition by a 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

59 F.3d 167
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished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.

Edward B. LUNSFORD, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 95-6231.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 23, 1995.

Edward B. Lunsford, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Norwood League, Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, NC, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

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. Lunsford v. North Carolina Attorney General, No. CA-94-215-1 (M.D.N.C. Jan. 13, 1995). 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 disposition by a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(c) (1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 F.3d 167, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23455, 1995 WL 373276, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edward-b-lunsford-v-north-carolina-attorney-genera-ca4-1995.