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)
01-8028•Dyzondria Brown v. Doug E. Catoe
01-8028Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 28, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-8028
DYZONDRIA BROWN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
DOUG E. CATOE; CHARLES M. 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 Charleston. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (CA-00-2810-9-10RB)
Submitted: March 21, 2002 Decided: March 28, 2002
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dyzondria Brown, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Dyzondria Brown appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &
Supp. 2001). 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 affirm on the reasoning
of the district court. Brown v. Catoe, No. CA-00-2810-9-10RB
(D.S.C. Sept. 26, 2001). 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.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.