Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Barnes v. Galley, 01-6281 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-6281 Visitors: 31
Filed: Aug. 01, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6281 LEE T. BARNES, SR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus JON P. GALLEY; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-00- 939-MJG) Submitted: June 29, 2001 Decided: August 1, 2001 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. L
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6281 LEE T. BARNES, SR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus JON P. GALLEY; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-00- 939-MJG) Submitted: June 29, 2001 Decided: August 1, 2001 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lee T. Barnes, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., At- torney General, Mary Ann Rapp Ince, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Lee T. Barnes, Sr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Barnes v. Galley, No. CA-00- 939-MJG (D. Md. Feb. 6, 2001). 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. DISMISSED 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer