Court Opinion

ID: 200504
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-02-07 04:54:23+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:27:08.972223
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
 

  We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. We
  
   affirm,
  
  essentially for the reasons stated in the district court’s memorandum of decision, dated August 12, 2002.
 

  We reject appellant’s contention that his habeas petition was dismissed by the district court without notice and an opportunity to be heard. Appellant, in fact, filed an opposition to the state’s motion to dismiss, which the court considered. Although appellant sought to file a
  
   second
  
  response to the motion to dismiss, the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing that request. Further, there was no abuse of discretion in denying appellant’s motion seeking an evidentiary hearing.
 

   Affirmed.
  

  Before BOUDIN, Chief Judge, LIPEZ and HOWARD, Circuit Judges.