Strickland v. Virginia

Fourth Circuit

Strickland v. Virginia

607 F. App'x 297

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 18, 2015

DocketNos. 14-7848, 14-7849

StatusPublished

This text of 607 F. App'x 297 (Strickland v. Virginia) 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. Virginia, 607 F. App'x 297 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion:

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Harold E. Strickland appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, denying relief on his complaints raising various claims under state and federal law, and denying his motions for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Strickland v. Virginia, No. 7:13-cv-00485-JPJ-PMS, 2014 WL 6452181 (W.D.Va. Nov. 17, 2014); Strickland v. Virginia Dep’t of Corr., No. 7:13-cv-00484-JPJ, 2014 WL 6452181 (W-D.Va. Nov. 17, 2014). We deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion:

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Harold E. Strickland appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, denying relief on his complaints raising various claims under state and federal law, and denying his motions for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Strickland v. Virginia, No. 7:13-cv-00485-JPJ-PMS, 2014 WL 6452181 (W.D.Va. Nov. 17, 2014); Strickland v. Virginia Dep’t of Corr., No. 7:13-cv-00484-JPJ, 2014 WL 6452181 (W-D.Va. Nov. 17, 2014). We deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

607 F. App'x 297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strickland-v-virginia-ca4-2015.