Lee v. West Virginia ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 01-7764
    PAUL A. LEE,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, by the Attorney
    General of the State of West Virginia,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,
    District Judge. (CA-00-143-5)
    Submitted:     February 27, 2002            Decided:   March 19, 2002
    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Paul A. Lee, Appellant Pro Se. Dawn Ellen Warfield, OFFICE OR THE
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Paul Lee filed a petition for habeas corpus seeking, in
    effect, to attack a 1976 West Virginia state conviction for armed
    robbery because that conviction was used to enhance a 1991 federal
    sentence for drug trafficking.   See 
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2254
     (West 1994
    & Supp. 2001).    The district court denied relief based on its
    conclusion that Lee was not “in custody” for purposes of the state
    conviction.   Lee appeals.
    Regardless of whether Lee is able to meet the in custody
    requirement for bringing a habeas petition, a prisoner may not
    (except in narrow circumstances not applicable in this case)
    collaterally attack an expired conviction that has been used to
    enhance a sentence for which the prisoner is presently in custody.
    Daniels v. United States, 
    532 U.S. 374
    , 382 (2001); Lackawanna
    County Dist. Attorney v. Cross, 
    532 U.S. 394
    , 403-04 (2001).    We
    therefore deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the
    appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before us and
    argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-7764

Judges: Widener, Niemeyer, Traxler

Filed Date: 3/19/2002

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024