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)
02-6384•Jerry Lee Hollars, Sr v. Michael Bell
02-6384Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 31, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6384
JERRY LEE HOLLARS, SR.,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
MICHAEL BELL,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,
District Judge. (CA-01-248-1)
Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: July 31, 2002
Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jerry Lee Hollars, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge,
III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Jerry Lee Hollars seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West
1994 & Supp. 2002). We have reviewed the record and the district
court’s opinion adopting 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
district court. See Hollars v. Bell, No. CA-01-248-1 (M.D.N.C. Feb.
8, 2002). 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.