Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Donald E. Waddell v. State of Maryland, 90-6084 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-6084 Visitors: 35
Filed: Mar. 20, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 929 F.2d 695 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Donald E. WADDELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE of Maryland, Respondent-Appellee. No. 90-6084. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted March 4, 1991. Decided March 20, 1991. Appeal from
More

929 F.2d 695
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Donald E. WADDELL, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
STATE of Maryland, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 90-6084.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 4, 1991.
Decided March 20, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Herbert F. Murray, Senior District Judge. (CA-88-1074)

Donald E. Waddell, appellant pro se.

Audrey A. Creighton, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Md., for appellee.

D.Md.

DISMISSED.

Before WIDENER and K.K. HALL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Donald E. Waddell seeks to appeal the district court's order refusing habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. 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. Waddell v. Maryland, CA-88-1074 (D.Md. May 8, 1990). 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