Roy Everett Bruce, Petitioner-appellant, v. Ernest Sutton; Attorney General of North Carolina,respondents-appellees, 993 F.2d 1535 (4th Cir. 1993)

 Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit - 993 F.2d 1535 (4th Cir. 1993) Submitted: May 3, 1993Decided: May 27, 1993

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. James B. McMillan, Senior District Judge. (CA-91-216)

Roy Everett Bruce, Appellant Pro Se.

Richard Norwood League, Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

W.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before RUSSELL and HALL, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

OPINION

Roy Everett Bruce appeals from the district court's orders that dismissed his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 complaint and denied his motion for reconsideration.1  Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal was properly dismissed because Bruce made no showing of cause and prejudice to excuse his failure to raise his claims in his earlier § 2254 complaint. See McCleskey v. Zant, 59 U.S.L.W. 4288 (U.S. 1991).2  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.

AFFIRMED

 1

We find that Bruce timely noted his appeal. See Smith v. Barry, 60 U.S.L.W. 4065 (U.S. 1992)

 2

We deny Bruce's motion for appointment of counsel. Whisenant v. Yuam, 739 F.2d 160 (4th Cir. 1984)

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.