United States v. Hairston

100 F. App'x 929
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Hairston. Read the opinion of the Court — 38 F. App'x 884
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 18, 2004·No. No. 04-6167·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Tracey Lee Hairston seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hairston has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). Accordingly, we deny Hairston’s motion for a certificate of appealability 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

United States v. Hairston, 100 F. App'x 929 (4th Cir. 2004).

100 F. App'x 929 (United States v. Hairston) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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