Melvin James Clark v. Daniel T. Mahon

Fourth Circuit

Melvin James Clark v. Daniel T. Mahon

59 F.3d 165, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23236, 1995 WL 370425

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 22, 1995

Docket95-6199

StatusPublished

This text of 59 F.3d 165 (Melvin James Clark v. Daniel T. Mahon) 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

Melvin James Clark v. Daniel T. Mahon, 59 F.3d 165, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23236, 1995 WL 370425 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

59 F.3d 165
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Melvin James CLARK, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
Daniel T. MAHON, Respondent--Appellee.

No. 95-6199.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 22, 1995.

Melvin James Clark, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Cauthorne Daniel, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, VA, for Appellee.

W.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court'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 district court. Clark v. Mahon, No. CA-94-480-R (W.D.Va. Jan. 31, 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.

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

59 F.3d 165
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Melvin James CLARK, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
Daniel T. MAHON, Respondent--Appellee.

No. 95-6199.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 22, 1995.

Melvin James Clark, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Cauthorne Daniel, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, VA, for Appellee.

W.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court'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 district court. Clark v. Mahon, No. CA-94-480-R (W.D.Va. Jan. 31, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 F.3d 165, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23236, 1995 WL 370425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/melvin-james-clark-v-daniel-t-mahon-ca4-1995.