Case Name: Gregory Flint TAYLOR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Joe HAMILTON, Secretary, North Carolina Department of Correction; Lynn Phillips, Director of Prisons; Michael Bumgarner, Superintendent, Nash Correctional Center; Michael Easley, Attorney General of North Carolina; State of North Carolina, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-03-28
Citations: 6 F. App'x 196
Docket Number: No. 00-7529
Parties: Gregory Flint TAYLOR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Joe HAMILTON, Secretary, North Carolina Department of Correction; Lynn Phillips, Director of Prisons; Michael Bumgarner, Superintendent, Nash Correctional Center; Michael Easley, Attorney General of North Carolina; State of North Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 6
Pages: 196–196

Head Matter:
Gregory Flint TAYLOR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Joe HAMILTON, Secretary, North Carolina Department of Correction; Lynn Phillips, Director of Prisons; Michael Bumgarner, Superintendent, Nash Correctional Center; Michael Easley, Attorney General of North Carolina; State of North Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 00-7529.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 22, 2001.
Decided March 28, 2001.
Thomas Franklin Loflin, III, Loflin & Loflin, Durham, NC, for appellant. Diane Appleton Reeves, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, NC, for appellees.
Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Gregory. Flint Taylor 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 record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Taylor v. Hamilton, No. CA-99-149-5-H (E.D.N.C. Sept. 12, 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.