Case ID: f-appx_12/html/0132-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Michael Grady LOCKLEAR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Daniel L. STIENEKE; Michael F. Easley, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 01-6230.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted April 12, 2001.
    Decided April 19, 2001.
    Michael Grady Locklear, pro se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, NC, for appellees.
    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Michael Grady Locklear 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). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala-bility and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Locklear v. Stieneke, No. CA-98-17-1-MU (W.D.N.C. Jan. 23, 2001). 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.