U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1998

Flemming v. Moore

Flemming v. Moore
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided August 28, 1998

Flemming v. Moore

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6733

EMMANUEL FLEMMING, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

MICHAEL MOORE, Director; WILLIAM E. GUNN, Director; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Charles E. Simons, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-96-3351-0-06BD)

Submitted: August 13, 1998 Decided: August 28, 1998

Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Emmanuel Flemming, Appellant Pro Se. Shelton Sterling Laney, III, HOLCOMBE, BOMAR, COTHRAN, GUNN & BRADFORD, P.A., Spartanburg, South Carolina; Carl Norman Lundberg, SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION, PAROLE & PARDON SERVICES, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). 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 appeal- ability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Flemming v. Moore, No. CA-96-3351-0-06BD (D.S.C. May 5, 1997). 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.

DISMISSED

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