Case Name: Mark E. RICHARDS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-11-26
Citations: 51 F. App'x 417
Docket Number: No. 02-7028
Parties: Mark E. RICHARDS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 51
Pages: 417–418

Head Matter:
Mark E. RICHARDS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 02-7028.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 7, 2002.
Decided Nov. 26, 2002.
Mark E. Richards, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Vorhis, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Mark E. Richards, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's order denying relief on his petition filed un der 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We have reviewed the record and conclude in part for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge that Richards has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Richards v. Angelone, CA-01-176-3 (E.D. Va. June 27, 2002). We further find Richards' claims regarding his parole revocation hearing were barred by the one year limitations period. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) (2000); Crawley v. Catoe, 257 F.3d 395, 399 (4th Cir.2001), cert, denied, — U.S.-, 122 S.Ct. 811, 151 L.Ed.2d 696 (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.
By consent of the parties, the decision below was rendered by a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).