Strickland v. Beck

61 F. App'x 79
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 25, 2003
DocketNo. 02-7808
StatusPublished

This text of 61 F. App'x 79 (Strickland v. Beck) 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
Strickland v. Beck, 61 F. App'x 79 (4th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

David Emanuel Strickland seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Strickland has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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

Related

Miller-El v. Cockrell
537 U.S. 322 (Supreme Court, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
61 F. App'x 79, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strickland-v-beck-ca4-2003.