Robert Payne v. Parker Evatt Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, in Re Robert Payne

Fourth Circuit

Robert Payne v. Parker Evatt Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, in Re Robert Payne

53 F.3d 328, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 16751

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 27, 1995

Docket95-6209

StatusPublished

This text of 53 F.3d 328 (Robert Payne v. Parker Evatt Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, in Re Robert Payne) 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 Payne v. Parker Evatt Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, in Re Robert Payne, 53 F.3d 328, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 16751 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

53 F.3d 328
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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 PAYNE, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
Parker EVATT; Attorney General of the State of South
Carolina, Respondents--Appellees.
In re Robert PAYNE, Petitioner.

Nos. 95-6209, 95-8010.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 16, 1995.
Decided March 27, 1995.

IN NO. 95-6209, PETITION DENIED IN NO. 95-8010.

Robert Payne, appellant pro se.

Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Columbia, SC, for appellees.

Before MURNAGHAN, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

In No. 95-6209, Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his motion for a stay of the execution of his state criminal sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses no abuse of discretion or other reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Payne v. Evatt, No. CA-94-3464-2-20AJ (D.S.C. Feb. 6, 1995). We deny Appellant's motion to stay execution of sentence and for bail, and his amended motion for stay of execution of sentence.

In No. 95-8010, Appellant filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in which he requests that this Court compel the district court to rule on the motion for a stay of execution of sentence discussed above in relation to No. 95-6209. Since the district court has acted on the motion, we deny Appellant's petition as moot. We also 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.

No. 95-6209--AFFIRMED.

No. 95-8010--PETITION DENIED.

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

53 F.3d 328
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 PAYNE, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
Parker EVATT; Attorney General of the State of South
Carolina, Respondents--Appellees.
In re Robert PAYNE, Petitioner.

Nos. 95-6209, 95-8010.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 16, 1995.
Decided March 27, 1995.

IN NO. 95-6209, PETITION DENIED IN NO. 95-8010.

Robert Payne, appellant pro se.

Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Columbia, SC, for appellees.

Before MURNAGHAN, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

In No. 95-6209, Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his motion for a stay of the execution of his state criminal sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses no abuse of discretion or other reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Payne v. Evatt, No. CA-94-3464-2-20AJ (D.S.C. Feb. 6, 1995). We deny Appellant's motion to stay execution of sentence and for bail, and his amended motion for stay of execution of sentence.

In No. 95-8010, Appellant filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in which he requests that this Court compel the district court to rule on the motion for a stay of execution of sentence discussed above in relation to No. 95-6209. Since the district court has acted on the motion, we deny Appellant's petition as moot. We also 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.

No. 95-6209--AFFIRMED.

No. 95-8010--PETITION DENIED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

53 F.3d 328, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 16751, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-payne-v-parker-evatt-attorney-general-of-th-ca4-1995.