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)
00-7574•Herbert Foy v. D. A. BRAXTON, Warden of the Buckingham Cor- rectional Center
00-7574Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 5, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-7574
HERBERT FOY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
D. A. BRAXTON, Warden of the Buckingham Cor-
rectional Center,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
Judge. (CA-99-1863-AM)
Submitted: May 22, 2001 Decided: June 5, 2001
Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Herbert Foy, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Andrew Witmer, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Herbert Foy appeals the district court’s order denying relief
on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.
2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin-
ion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certif-
icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of
the district court. See Foy v. Braxton, No. CA-99-1863-AM (E.D.
Va. Sept. 28, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-
terials 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.