U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1991

Norman G. Berg v. Edward W. Murray, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General of the State of Virginia

Norman G. Berg v. Edward W. Murray, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General of the State of Virginia
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided July 3, 1991
937 F.2d 602; 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 20299; 1991 WL 117990 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Norman G. Berg v. Edward W. Murray, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General of the State of Virginia

Opinion

937 F.2d 602
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Norman G. BERG, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Edward W. MURRAY, Director, Virginia Department of
Corrections, Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General of
the State of Virginia, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 90-7503.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 20, 1991.
Decided July 3, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-90-1656-N)

Norman G. Berg, appellant pro se.

E.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before DONALD RUSSELL and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Norman G. Berg seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal, deny appellant's motion for appointment of counsel, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Berg v. Murray, CA-90-1656-N (E.D.Va. Nov. 20, 1990). 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.

2

DISMISSED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.