Engress L. Harris v. Fay Lassiter Attorney General of North Carolina

947 F.2d 940, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 30445, 1991 WL 227815
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 7, 1991
Docket91-6574
StatusUnpublished

This text of 947 F.2d 940 (Engress L. Harris v. Fay Lassiter 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
Engress L. Harris v. Fay Lassiter Attorney General of North Carolina, 947 F.2d 940, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 30445, 1991 WL 227815 (4th Cir. 1991).

Opinion

947 F.2d 940

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Engress L. HARRIS, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Fay LASSITER; Attorney General of North Carolina,
Respondents-Appellees.

No. 91-6574.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 15, 1991.
Decided Nov. 7, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-90-657-HC-H)

Engress L. Harris, appellant pro se.

Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, N.C., for appellees.

E.D.N.C.

DISMISSED.

Before WIDENER, K.K. HALL and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Engress L. Harris seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Harris v. Lassiter, CA-90-657-HC-H (E.D.N.C. Apr. 29, 1991). 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.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
947 F.2d 940, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 30445, 1991 WL 227815, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/engress-l-harris-v-fay-lassiter-attorney-general-of-north-carolina-ca4-1991.