Filed: Oct. 26, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6947 CHARLES EDWARD ELLIS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus FRANK SIZER, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 97-3945-CCB) Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 26, 1998 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6947 CHARLES EDWARD ELLIS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus FRANK SIZER, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 97-3945-CCB) Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 26, 1998 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-6947
CHARLES EDWARD ELLIS, JR.,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
FRANK SIZER, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF MARYLAND,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA-
97-3945-CCB)
Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 26, 1998
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles Edward Ellis, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran,
Jr., Attorney General, David Jonathan Taube, Assistant Attorney
General, Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARY-
LAND, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.
1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of
appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the
district court. Ellis v. Sizer, No. CA-97-3945-CCB (D. Md. June 17,
1998). We also deny Appellant’s motion for transcript at government
expense. 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
2