Case Name: Thomas HOCKADAY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Cordelia M. CLARK, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-01-28
Citations: 24 F. App'x 235
Docket Number: No. 01-7390
Parties: Thomas HOCKADAY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Cordelia M. CLARK, RespondentAppellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 24
Pages: 235–235

Head Matter:
Thomas HOCKADAY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Cordelia M. CLARK, RespondentAppellee.
No. 01-7390.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 17, 2002.
Decided Jan. 28, 2002.
Bruce Tracy Cunningham, Jr., Cunningham, Dedmond, Petersen & Smith, Southern Pines, North Carolina, for Appellant. Diane Appleton Reeves, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Thomas Hockaday seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2001). We have reviewed the record and 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 on the reasoning of the district court. See Hockaday v. Clark, No. CA-00-387-1 (M.D.N.C. July 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.