U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1997

Powell v. Lee

Powell v. Lee
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided August 25, 1997

Powell v. Lee

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7655

WILLIAM FRANK POWELL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

RANDY LEE, Superintendent of Caledonia Correc- tional Institution, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-95-712-5-BR)

Submitted: August 14, 1997 Decided: August 25, 1997

Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Frank Powell, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).

PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994) (current version at 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). 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 deny Appellant's motion for a certificate of appealability, deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Powell v. Lee, No. CA-95-712-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Oct. 4, 1996). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL 338568 (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No. 96- 6298). We deny Appellant's motions for appointment of counsel and for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

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