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

Hillman v. Hinkle

Hillman v. Hinkle
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided December 20, 2000

Hillman v. Hinkle

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-7418

MICHAEL D. HILLMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

GEORGE M. HINKLE, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-99-219-AM)

Submitted: December 14, 2000 Decided: December 20, 2000

Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael D. Hillman, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Kathleen Beatty Martin, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Michael D. Hillman appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a cer- tificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

Hillman v. Hinkle, No. CA-99-219-AM (E.D. Va. filed Sept. 25, 2000; entered Sept. 27, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

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