Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Aaron Holsey v. Richard Singleton, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland, 91-7218 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-7218 Visitors: 38
Filed: Nov. 12, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 947 F.2d 941 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Aaron HOLSEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Richard SINGLETON, Warden; Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees. No. 91-7218. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 28, 1991. Decided Nov.
More

947 F.2d 941

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Aaron HOLSEY, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Richard SINGLETON, Warden; Attorney General of the State of
Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 91-7218.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 28, 1991.
Decided Nov. 12, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CA-89-2416-K)

Aaron Holsey, appellant pro se.

John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Ronald Mark Levitan, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Md., for appellees.

D.Md.

DISMISSED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, SPROUSE, Circuit Judge, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Aaron Holsey seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988). 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 reasoning of the district court. Holsey v. Singleton, No. CA-89-2416-K (D.Md. July 16, 1991). 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