Case Name: Frank M. CONNELL, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director of the Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee; Frank M. Connell, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. Angelone, Director of the Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-09-03
Citations: 43 F. App'x 723
Docket Number: Nos. 02-6514, 02-6881
Parties: Frank M. CONNELL, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director of the Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee. Frank M. Connell, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. Angelone, Director of the Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 43
Pages: 723–724

Head Matter:
Frank M. CONNELL, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director of the Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee. Frank M. Connell, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. Angelone, Director of the Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
Nos. 02-6514, 02-6881.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 9, 2002.
Decided Sept. 3, 2002.
Frank M. Connell, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Frank M. Connell, Jr., appeals the district court's orders dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition for faffing to file an amended petition within the time set forth in the court's order permitting the amendment, and denying Connell's motion for additional findings. After reviewing the record and the district court's opinion, we conclude that Connell has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, we deny certificates of appealability and dismiss these appeals on the reasoning of the district court. See Connell v. Angelone, No. CA-01-806-2 (E.D. Va. Feb. 26, 2002 & May 8, 2002). 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.