Case ID: f-appx_12/html/0114-02.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

Robert JONES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Martha A. WANNAMAKER, Warden at Tyger River Correctional Institution; Charles M. Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 00-7804.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted April 12, 2001.
    Decided April 17, 2001.
    
      Robert Jones, pro se. Derrick K McFarland, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, for ap-pellees.
    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Robert Jones appeals 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 district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. Jones v. Wannamaker, No. CA-1238-2-18AJ (D.S.C. Oct. 31, 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. 
      
      
         The district court denied relief based partially on the interpretation of § 2254(d)(1) announced in Green v. French, 143 F.3d 865 (4th Cir.1998). The Supreme Court overruled that aspect of Green, however, in Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 120 S.Ct. 1495, 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000). We have reviewed Jones' appeal in light of Williams and conclude that the state post conviction court's decision was not contraiy to, and did not involve an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court. Id. at 409-10.