# Michael Lynn Brown v. Don Guillory, Warden

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · August 6, 1996 · 92 F.3d 1177

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/724196

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** August 6, 1996
- **Citations:** 92 F.3d 1177; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 25571; 1996 WL 439130
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished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/724196

## Opinion text

92 F.3d 1177
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Michael Lynn BROWN, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Don GUILLORY, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 96-6795.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 23, 1996.
Decided: August 6, 1996.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert R. Merhige, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-95-735-R)
Michael Lynn Brown, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, VA, for Appellee.
E.D.Va.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
1
Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his habeas corpus petition, 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988), as amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1217. 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. Brown v. Guillory, No. CA-95-735-R (E.D.Va. May 3, 1996). 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/724196. Public record. Not legal advice.