Clayton George Smith v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-6140
CLAYTON GEORGE SMITH,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:19-cv-00072-RGD-DEM)
Submitted: March 30, 2022 Decided: April 27, 2022
Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: S. W. Dawson, DAWSON, P.L.C., Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant. Mark
R. Herring, Attorney General, Laura Haeberle Cahill, Assistant Attorney General, Toby J.
Heytens, Solicitor General, Michelle S. Kallen, Martine E. Cicconi, Deputy Solicitors
General, Jessica Merry Samuels, Assistant Solicitor General, Kendall T. Burchard,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Clayton George Smith appeals the district court’s order accepting the magistrate
judge’s recommendation to deny relief on Smith’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. The district
court granted a certificate of appealability on one issue: whether the Virginia state trial
court improperly denied Smith’s motion to suppress his incriminating statements, in
contravention of Miranda.* We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Smith v. Clarke, No.
2:19-cv-00072-RGD-DEM (E.D. Va. Dec. 18, 2019). We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
* Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).

-- 2 of 2 --