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)
00-7582•Mario Ballard v. P. TRUE, Warden
00-7582Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 27, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-7582
MARIO BALLARD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
P. TRUE, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge.
(CA-00-264-3)
Submitted: June 21, 2001 Decided: June 27, 2001
Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mario Ballard, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Drummond Bagwell, Assis-
tant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Mario Ballard seeks to appeal 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 opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny
a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the rea-
soning of the district court. Ballard v. True, No. CA-00-264-3
(E.D. Va. Oct 24, 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.