# Brown v. Padula

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · March 30, 2000

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1001228

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** March 30, 2000
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1001228

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7568

THOMAS BROWN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

ANTHONY J. PADULA, Warden; CHARLES CONDON, At-
torney General of the State of South Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (CA-99-1310-6-13AK)

Submitted: March 23, 2000 Decided: March 30, 2000

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy
Attorney General, Derrick K. McFarland, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Thomas Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s order deny-

ing 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 certif-

icate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. See Brown v. Padula, No. CA-99-1310-6-13AK

(D.S.C. Oct. 29, 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1001228. Public record. Not legal advice.