Robert Charles Branscome v. Ronald Angelone, Director

Fourth Circuit

Robert Charles Branscome v. Ronald Angelone, Director

74 F.3d 1230, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 39025, 1996 WL 15417

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 17, 1996

Docket95-7447

StatusPublished

This text of 74 F.3d 1230 (Robert Charles Branscome v. Ronald Angelone, Director) 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

Robert Charles Branscome v. Ronald Angelone, Director, 74 F.3d 1230, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 39025, 1996 WL 15417 (4th Cir. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

74 F.3d 1230
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Robert Charles BRANSCOME, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Ronald ANGELONE, Director, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 95-7447.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 1995.
Decided Jan. 17, 1996.

Robert Charles Branscome, Appellant Pro Se. Katherine P. Baldwin, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order and order on reconsideration 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. Branscome v. Angelone, No. CA-95-207-R (E.D. Va. July 17, 1995 & Aug. 8, 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.

DISMISSED

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

74 F.3d 1230
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Robert Charles BRANSCOME, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Ronald ANGELONE, Director, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 95-7447.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 14, 1995.
Decided Jan. 17, 1996.

Robert Charles Branscome, Appellant Pro Se. Katherine P. Baldwin, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order and order on reconsideration 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. Branscome v. Angelone, No. CA-95-207-R (E.D. Va. July 17, 1995 & Aug. 8, 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.

DISMISSED

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 F.3d 1230, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 39025, 1996 WL 15417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-charles-branscome-v-ronald-angelone-directo-ca4-1996.