Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Howard Jerome Hinton v. State of Maryland Attorney General of the State of Maryland, 94-6569 (1994)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 94-6569 Visitors: 25
Filed: Jul. 27, 1994
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 30 F.3d 129 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Howard Jerome HINTON, Petitioner Appellant, v. State of MARYLAND; Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents Appellees. No. 94-6569. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted June 23, 1994 Decided July 2
More

30 F.3d 129

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.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

No. 94-6569.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 23, 1994
Decided July 27, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. John R. Hargrove, Senior District Judge. (CA-93-404-HAR)

Howard Jerome Hinton, appellant pro se.

John Joseph Curran, Jr., Atty. Gen., Ann Norman Bosse, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Md., for appellees.

D.Md.

DISMISSED.

Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 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 deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Hinton v. Maryland, No. CA-93-404-HAR (D. Md. May 10, 1994). 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

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