William Henry Fields v. Warden of the Staunton Correctional Center

Fourth Circuit

William Henry Fields v. Warden of the Staunton Correctional Center

74 F.3d 1231, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 38828, 1996 WL 23197

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 23, 1996·No. 95-6833·Published

Opinion

74 F.3d 1231
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

William Henry FIELDS, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
WARDEN OF THE STAUNTON CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Respondent--Appellee.

No. 95-6833.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 11, 1996.
Decided Jan. 23, 1996.

William Henry Fields, Appellant Pro Se.

Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

PER CURIAM

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Fields v. Warden, Staunton Correctional Ctr., No. CA-94-825-R (W.D.Va. Apr. 28, 1995). We deny Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel and 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

74 F.3d 1231
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

William Henry FIELDS, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
WARDEN OF THE STAUNTON CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Respondent--Appellee.

No. 95-6833.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 11, 1996.
Decided Jan. 23, 1996.

William Henry Fields, Appellant Pro Se.

Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

PER CURIAM

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Fields v. Warden, Staunton Correctional Ctr., No. CA-94-825-R (W.D.Va. Apr. 28, 1995). We deny Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel and 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

William Henry Fields v. Warden of the Staunton Correctional Center, 74 F.3d 1231, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 38828, 1996 WL 23197 (4th Cir. 1996).

Pincite

74 F.3d 1231 (William Henry Fields v. Warden of the Staunton Correctional Center) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.