Priscilla Penne Waugh v. Joseph Hamilton, Director of Prisons

948 F.2d 1284, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 31880, 1991 WL 235249
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 13, 1991
Docket91-7159
StatusUnpublished

This text of 948 F.2d 1284 (Priscilla Penne Waugh v. Joseph Hamilton, Director of Prisons) 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
Priscilla Penne Waugh v. Joseph Hamilton, Director of Prisons, 948 F.2d 1284, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 31880, 1991 WL 235249 (4th Cir. 1991).

Opinion

948 F.2d 1284

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Priscilla Penne WAUGH, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Joseph HAMILTON, Director of Prisons, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 91-7159.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 28, 1991.
Decided Nov. 13, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-91-146-HC-BO)

Priscilla Penne Waugh, appellant pro se.

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

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, SPROUSE, Circuit Judge, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Priscilla Penne Waugh appeals from the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Waugh v. Hamilton, No. CA-91-146-HC-BO (E.D.N.C. June 7, 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)
948 F.2d 1284, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 31880, 1991 WL 235249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/priscilla-penne-waugh-v-joseph-hamilton-director-o-ca4-1991.