Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Robert Clifton Johnson, Jr. v. Siebert Stephen Clifton T. Perkins Hospital Center Attorney General of the State of Maryland, 89-7729 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 89-7729 Visitors: 16
Filed: Feb. 23, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 898 F.2d 145 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Robert Clifton JOHNSON, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Siebert STEPHEN; Clifton T. Perkins Hospital Center; Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees. No. 89-7729. United States Court
More

898 F.2d 145
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Robert Clifton JOHNSON, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Siebert STEPHEN; Clifton T. Perkins Hospital Center;
Attorney General of the State of Maryland,
Respondents-Appellees.

No. 89-7729.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Aug. 31, 1989.
Decided: Feb. 23, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Edward S. Northrop, Senior District Judge. (C/A No. 89-1840-N)

Robert Clifton Johnson, Jr., appellant pro se.

D.Md.

DISMISSED.

Before DONALD RUSSELL, WIDENER and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Robert Clifton Johnson, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the resoning of the district court. Johnson v. Stephen, C/A No. 89-1840-N (D.Md. June 28, 1989). 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.

2

DISMISSED.

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