Court Opinion

ID: 1000427
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:40:42.111891+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:17.937677
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 99-7439

WILLIE JOHNSON,

                                           Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

WILLIAM D. CATOE, Director of SCDC; CHARLES M.
CONDON, Attorney General for the State of
South Carolina,

                                          Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior Dis-
trict Judge. (CA-99-1070-0-10BD)

Submitted:   December 16, 1999         Decided:     December 22, 1999

Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir-
cuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Willie Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.     Donald John Zelenka, Chief
Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Willie Johnson appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1999).   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 dis-

trict court.   See Johnson v. Catoe, No. CA-99-1070-0-10BD (D.S.C.

Oct. 12, 1999).*   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

    *
       Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
October 8, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on October 12, 1999. Pursuant to Rules
58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the
date entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date
of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d
1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

                                 2