The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
00-6156•James Mark McDaniel v. DOUG CATOE, Commissioner of the South Carolina Department of Corrections
00-6156Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 31, 2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6156
JAMES MARK MCDANIEL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
DOUG CATOE, Commissioner of the South Carolina
Department of Corrections; COLIE RUSHTON,
Warden of McCormick Correctional Institution;
CHARLES MOLONY CONDON, Attorney General of the
State of South Carolina,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.
(CA-99-2391)
Submitted: March 23, 2000 Decided: March 31, 2000
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Mark McDaniel, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief
Deputy Attorney General, Derrick K. McFarland, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
James Mark McDaniel appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &
Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s
opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the dis-
trict court. See McDaniel v. Catoe, No. CA-99-2391 (D.S.C. Dec.
13, 1999). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.