Case Name: James Bennett LATHAM, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. David A. GARRAGHTY, Warden, Respondent-Appellee; James Bennett Latham, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. David A. Garraghty, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-08-29
Citations: 15 F. App'x 188
Docket Number: Nos. 01-6077, 01-6385
Parties: James Bennett LATHAM, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. David A. GARRAGHTY, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. James Bennett Latham, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. David A. Garraghty, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 15
Pages: 188–188

Head Matter:
James Bennett LATHAM, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. David A. GARRAGHTY, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. James Bennett Latham, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. David A. Garraghty, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Nos. 01-6077, 01-6385.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 23, 2001.
Decided Aug. 29, 2001.
James Bennett Latham, Jr., pro se. Richard Carson Vorhis, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, VA, for appellee.
Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
James Bennett Latham, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2001) and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny certificates of appealability and dismiss these appeals on the reasoning of the district court. Latham v. Garraghty, No. CA-00-1005-AM (E.D. Va. Dec. 6, 2000; filed Feb. 6, 2001, and entered Feb. 9, 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.