Filed: Jan. 26, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7037 CHARLES WOODLAND-EL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Warden, Maryland House of Correction Annex; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-96- 3923-L) Submitted: November 25, 1997 Decided: January 26, 1998 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7037 CHARLES WOODLAND-EL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Warden, Maryland House of Correction Annex; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-96- 3923-L) Submitted: November 25, 1997 Decided: January 26, 1998 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges...
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7037 CHARLES WOODLAND-EL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Warden, Maryland House of Correction Annex; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-96- 3923-L) Submitted: November 25, 1997 Decided: January 26, 1998 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles Woodland-El, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Annabelle Louise Lisic, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reason- ing of the district court. Woodland-El v. Corcoran, No. CA-96-3923- L (D. Md. May 20, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2