Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Wali S. Clinton v. Seawall Smith, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland, 93-6098 (1993)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 93-6098 Visitors: 14
Filed: Nov. 15, 1993
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 9 F.3d 1543 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Wali S. CLINTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Seawall SMITH, Warden; Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees. No. 93-6098. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: October 25, 1993. Decided: N
More

9 F.3d 1543

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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

No. 93-6098.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 25, 1993.
Decided: November 15, 1993.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.

Wali S. Clinton, Appellant Pro Se.

John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, David Phelps Kennedy, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, for Appellees.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and PHILLIPS and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

OPINION

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) petition. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Clinton v. Smith, No. CA92-1942 (D. Md. Jan. 5, 1993). 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