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)
99-7146•Fernandez Harvey v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 4th Cir. 1986 . 2 PER CURIAM: Fernandez Harvey…
99-7146Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 29, 2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-7146
FERNANDEZ HARVEY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
CAROLYN CROSS, Warden, Lawrenceville Correc-
tional 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-99-976-AM)
Submitted: March 23, 2000 Decided: March 29, 2000
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Fernandez Harvey, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
* Although the district court’s judgment or order is marked as
“filed” on July 19, 1999, the district court’s record shows that it
was entered on the docket sheet on July 20, 1999. Pursuant to
Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is
the date that the judgment or order was entered on the docket sheet
that we take as the effective date of the district court’s
decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir.
1986).
2
PER CURIAM:
Fernandez Harvey 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 and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a cer-
tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning
of the district court. See Harvey v. Cross, No. CA-99-976-AM (E.D.
Va. July 20, 1999). * We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-
rials 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.