Tom Tucker Mayle v. Harrison County Correctional Center Robert Linville, Chief Jail Administrator

879 F.2d 862, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 9971, 1989 WL 79739
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJuly 13, 1989
Docket88-7304
StatusUnpublished

This text of 879 F.2d 862 (Tom Tucker Mayle v. Harrison County Correctional Center Robert Linville, Chief Jail Administrator) 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
Tom Tucker Mayle v. Harrison County Correctional Center Robert Linville, Chief Jail Administrator, 879 F.2d 862, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 9971, 1989 WL 79739 (4th Cir. 1989).

Opinion

879 F.2d 862
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Tom Tucker MAYLE, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
HARRISON COUNTY CORRECTIONAL CENTER; Robert Linville, Chief
Jail Administrator, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 88-7304.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 4, 1989.
Decided: July 13, 1989.

Tom Tucker Mayle, appellant pro se.

Stephen M. Glass (Harrison County Prosecuting Attorney), for appellees.

Before K.K. HALL, WILKINSON and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Tom Tucker Mayle seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Mayle v. Harrison County Correctional Center, C/A No. 88-115-E (N.D.W.Va. Oct. 24, 1988). 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
879 F.2d 862, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 9971, 1989 WL 79739, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tom-tucker-mayle-v-harrison-county-correctional-center-robert-linville-ca4-1989.