John Calvin Cofield v. Edward W. Murray, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections

904 F.2d 699, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 8545, 1990 WL 76519
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 25, 1990
Docket89-6830
StatusUnpublished

This text of 904 F.2d 699 (John Calvin Cofield v. Edward W. Murray, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections) 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
John Calvin Cofield v. Edward W. Murray, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, 904 F.2d 699, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 8545, 1990 WL 76519 (4th Cir. 1990).

Opinion

904 F.2d 699
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
John Calvin COFIELD, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Edward W. MURRAY, Director of the Virginia Department of
Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 89-6830.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 7, 1990.
Decided: May 25, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Clavitt Clarke, Jr., District Judge. (C/A No. 89-401-N).

John Calvin Cofield, appellant pro se.

Robert Harkness Herring, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Va., for appellee.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and CHAPMAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

John Calvin Cofield seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate 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. Cofield v. Murray, CA-89-401-N (E.D.Va. Sept. 6, 1989). 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

*

This case was put in abeyance pending this Court's opinion in Kaufhold v. Jackson, No. 89-7539. The unpublished opinion in Kaufhold was issued on April 13, 1990. In Kaufhold, we applied established precedent to reject a claim that "the serious nature and circumstances of [the prisoner's] crimes" provided an inadequate basis for denial of parole. (Slip op. at 2-3). We are bound by these established rules in this case

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

Related

Coffey (William H.) v. Pslj, Inc
904 F.2d 699 (Fourth Circuit, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
904 F.2d 699, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 8545, 1990 WL 76519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-calvin-cofield-v-edward-w-murray-director-of-the-virginia-ca4-1990.