Court Opinion

ID: 993135
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 00:02:59.693933+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:22.673050
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 97-6701

JIMMY TINSLEY,

                                           Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

RON ANGELONE,

                                            Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.
(CA-96-119-R)

Submitted:   September 11, 1997       Decided:   September 23, 1997

Before RUSSELL, MURNAGHAN, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jimmy Tinsley, Appellant Pro Se. Katherine P. Baldwin, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994) (current

version at 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). 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 probable cause to ap-

peal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

Tinsley v. Angelone, No. CA-96-119-R (W.D. VA. Apr. 14, 1997). See
Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997 WL 338568 (U.S. June 23, 1997)

(No. 96-6298). 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

                                2