Court Opinion

ID: 999937
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:32:52.462408+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:35:13.907004
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 99-6676

WILLIAM H. ROGERS,

                                            Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

JOSEPH L. HAMILTON, Acting Secretary of De-
partment of Correction,

                                             Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge.
(CA-98-242-5-F)

Submitted:   September 30, 1999           Decided:   October 6, 1999

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William H. Rogers, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     William H. Rogers seeks to appeal 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 cer-

tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court.   See Rogers v. Hamilton, No. CA-98-242-5-F

(E.D.N.C. Apr. 30, 1999).   We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-

terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

                                                         DISMISSED

                                 2