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

Stansbury v. State of SC

Stansbury v. State of SC
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided November 18, 1997

Stansbury v. State of SC

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7923

CALVIN LEE STANSBURY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, the Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-96-201-3-22-BC)

Submitted: November 6, 1997 Decided: November 18, 1997

Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Calvin Lee Stansbury, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 a certificate of probable cause to ap- peal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

Stansbury v. South Carolina, No. CA-96-201-3-22-BC (D.S.C. Dec. 9, 1996). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL 338568 (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). 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

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