Hart v. Snoddgrass
Hart v. Snoddgrass
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-7487
BRIAN KEITH HART, Petitioner - Appellant, versus SNODDGRASS, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate Judge. (CA-95-181-3)
Submitted: March 5, 1996 Decided: March 28, 1996
Before HALL and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brian Keith Hart, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Bain Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant a certificate of probable cause and affirm the district court. All of the Appellant's claims are proce- durally barred, see Harris v. Reed, 489 U.S. 255 (1989); Wainright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72, 87 (1977), except those alleging that his trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance of counsel and that his sentence was excessive. The claims that are not procedurally barred, though, are without merit, as explained in the district court's opinion. Hart v. Snoddgrass, No. CA-95-181-3 (E.D. Va. Sept. 8, 1995). We deny the motion for bail pending appeal in light of this disposition. 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.
AFFIRMED
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.