Notice: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(C) States that Citation of Unpublished Dispositions is Disfavored Except for Establishing Res Judicata, Estoppel, or the Law of the Case and Requires Service of Copies of Cited Unpublished Dispositions of the Sixth Circuit. Chung K. Yim, Petitioner-Appellant, v. John W. Prelesnik, Respondent-Appellee., 946 F.2d 896 (6th Cir. 1991)

Federal Circuits, 6th Cir. (October 04, 1991)

Docket number: 91-1184
Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/37401386
Id. vLex: VLEX-37401386

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

Text:

Before BOYCE F. MARTIN, JR. and MILBURN, Circuit Judges, and JOINER, Senior District Judge.*

ORDER

Chung K. Yim, a pro se Michigan prisoner, appeals from a district court judgment dismissing his petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

In 1983, Yim was convicted by a jury on four counts of first degree felony murder. Yim was sentenced to four terms of life imprisonment. The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed Yim's conviction and the Michigan Supreme Court denied further review.

Yim then filed the present petition for writ of habeas corpus. Yim alleged that certain inculpatory statements that he had made to the police were admitted at trial in violation of his Miranda rights. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 478-79 (1966). Over Yim's objections, the district court adopted the magistrate's report and recommendation and dismissed the case. Yim has filed a timely appeal. In his brief, he requests the appointment of counsel.

Upon review, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed Yim's habeas petition because Yim was not denied a fundamentally fair trial. See Lundy v. Campbell, 888 F.2d 467, 469-70 (6th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 110 S.Ct. 2212 (1990).

Accordingly, we deny counsel and affirm the judgment for the reasons set forth in the magistrate's report and recommendation filed on November 28, 1990, as adopted by the district court in its order filed on December 19, 1990. Rule 9(b)(3), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

* The Honorable Charles W. Joiner, U.S. Senior District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation

Other documents:
48 CFR 422.1406 - Complaint procedures. | Mcentyre v Clack Et Al. 104 Ga App 646 122 S.E.2d 595 1961 | 40 cfr 124.31 - pre-application public meeting and notice. | U.S. v. Porter **, 20 F.3d 1175 (11th Cir. 1994) | ANUNCI pel qual es fa publica la licitacio d un contracte. | un nuevo terremoto mata a seis personas y siembra el pánico en turquía | RESOLUCION de 25 de abril de 2000, de la Direccion General de Trabajo, por la que se dispone la inscripcion en el Registro y publ... | ANUNCIO relativo a la aprobacion inicial de las Normas Subsidiarias de Planea... | Aprobacion definitiva Proyecto Reparcelacion del Sector 1 | Milwaukee se rinde al festival de triples de Memphis | Case of Tribunal Superior de Justicia Palma de Mallorca Baleares Sala de lo Social of December 24 1997