Springs v. South Carolina

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Springs v. South Carolina, 50 F. App'x 152 (4th Cir. 2002)

Springs v. South Carolina

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated appeals, Lacosta Montrell Springs seeks to appeal the district court’s orders accepting the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition filed *153under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) and then denying a certificate of appealability. We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Springs has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Springs v. South Carolina, No. CA-00-3854-19-BD (D.S.C. filed Mar. 28, 2002, and June 3, 2002; entered Mar. 29, 2002, and June 5, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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.

Reference

Full Case Name
Lacosta Montrell SPRINGS v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA Charles M. Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees Lacosta Montrell Springs v. State of South Carolina Charles M. Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina
Status
Published