Hawkins v. Harkleroad
This text of 120 F. App'x 940 (Hawkins v. Harkleroad) 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
Tony A. Hawkins appeals the district court’s order denying his motion he labeled as filed under Rule 61 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
AFFIRMED
To the extent that Hawkins’ motion could have been construed as a motion under Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b), we note he did not satisfy the criteria for relief under that rule. Further, to the extent Hawkins' appeal could be construed as a motion seeking authorization under 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (2000) to Me a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition, Hawkins failed to demonstrate he is entitled to such authorization.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
120 F. App'x 940, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hawkins-v-harkleroad-ca4-2005.