U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2000

Chappell v. Easley

Chappell v. Easley
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided November 16, 2000

Chappell v. Easley

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-7410

IRVING D. CHAPPELL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

MICHAEL F. EASLEY, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CA-00-138-1)

Submitted: November 9, 2000 Decided: November 16, 2000

Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Irving D. Chappell, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Irving D. Chappell seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000) for his failure to obtain authorization under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244 (West Supp. 2000) to file a successive petition.

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion adopt- ing the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the motion for a certificate of ap- pealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Chappell v. Easley, No. CA-00-138-1 (M.D.N.C. Sept. 25, 2000). We also deny Chappell’s motion for the appointment of counsel. 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.