Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Notice: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) States That Citation of Unpublished Dispositions is Disfavored Except for Establishing Res Judicata, Estoppel, or the Law of the Case and Requires Service of Copies of Cited Unpublished Dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.haywood Allen Cannon, Petitioner--appellant, v. State of North Carolina, Respondent--appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. - 110 F.3d 59
April 2, 1997
Haywood Allen Cannon, Appellant Pro Se.
Clarence Joe DelForge, III, Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214, and denying his motion for reconsideration. 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 appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Cannon v. North Carolina, No. CA-95-675-5-H (E.D.N.C. July 8, 1996 and May 14, 1996). We deny Appellant's motions for an order enjoining state court Judge Duke from presiding over any cases filed by Appellant and for copies of law clerks' memoranda to the court concerning this appeal and Appellant's prior appeals. We also deny Appellant's motions for appointment of counsel and for 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