Robert Lloyd Cady v. T.A. Lee, Superintendent

17 F.3d 1433, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 12187, 1994 WL 64716
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 2, 1994
Docket92-7071
StatusPublished

This text of 17 F.3d 1433 (Robert Lloyd Cady v. T.A. Lee, Superintendent) 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 Lloyd Cady v. T.A. Lee, Superintendent, 17 F.3d 1433, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 12187, 1994 WL 64716 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

17 F.3d 1433
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Robert Lloyd CADY, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
T.A. LEE, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 92-7071.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 6, 1993.
Decided March 2, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-92-173-HC)

Robert Lloyd Cady, Appellant Pro Se.

Clarence Joe DelForge, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, NC, for Appellee.

E.D.N.C.

DISMISSED.

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Robert Lloyd Cady seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Cady v. Lee, No. CA-92-173-HC (E.D.N.C. Sept. 15, 1992). We deny Cady's motion for appointment of counsel and 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 F.3d 1433, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 12187, 1994 WL 64716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-lloyd-cady-v-ta-lee-superintendent-ca4-1994.