Court Opinion

ID: 1006970
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 19:18:52.210062+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:53.295048
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 01-7949

CHRISTOPHER RONALD PILENZO,

                                             Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

                                              Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CA-01-365-3)

Submitted:   March 14, 2002                 Decided:   March 22, 2002

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Laura Lynne Wagner, Richmond, Virginia; Ned Matthew Mikula, RUDY &
MIKULA, Chesterfield, Virginia, for Appellant. Mary Kathleen Beatty
Martin, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

     Christopher Ronald Pilenzo appeals 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 and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the

reasoning of the district court. See Pilenzo v. Director, Dep’t of

Corr., No. CA-01-365-3 (E.D. Va. Oct. 25, 2001).   We dispense with

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-

ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

                                                         DISMISSED

                                  2