Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Anthony Lawrence McLean v. Edward A. Hamblen, Judge Frank A. Hoss, Jr., Judge Louann White, 92-6435 (1992)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 92-6435 Visitors: 17
Filed: Aug. 04, 1992
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 972 F.2d 341 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Anthony Lawrence MCLEAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Edward A. HAMBLEN, Judge; Frank A. Hoss, JR., Judge; LouAnn White, Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-6435. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: July 20, 1992 Decide
More

972 F.2d 341

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Anthony Lawrence MCLEAN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Edward A. HAMBLEN, Judge; Frank A. Hoss, JR., Judge;
LouAnn White, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 92-6435.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 20, 1992
Decided: August 4, 1992

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-92-187-AM)

Anthony Lawrence McLean, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.Va.

Affirmed.

Before MURNAGHAN, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Anthony Lawrence McLean appeals from the district court's order construing his complaint as a petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) and dismissing the petition without prejudice for failing to show exhaustion of state court remedies. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. McLean v. Hamblen, No. CA-92-187-AM (E.D. Va. Mar. 24, 1992). 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.

AFFIRMED

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