Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Warren Fletcher-El v. William C. Brennan, Jr. Attorney Maureen Lamasney, Attorney David Simpson, Assistant States Attorney, 93-7356 (1994)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 93-7356 Visitors: 13
Filed: May 10, 1994
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 23 F.3d 400 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Warren FLETCHER-EL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William C. BRENNAN, Jr.; Attorney; Maureen Lamasney, Attorney; David Simpson, Assistant States Attorney, Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-7356. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
More

23 F.3d 400
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Warren FLETCHER-EL, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
William C. BRENNAN, Jr.; Attorney; Maureen Lamasney,
Attorney; David Simpson, Assistant States
Attorney, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 93-7356.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 21, 1994.
Decided May 10, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-93-3868-WN)

Warren Fletcher-El, pro se.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Warren T. Fletcher-El appeals the dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint for failure to exhaust, in which he attacked the validity of his conviction, and sought monetary and declaratory relief. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Fletcher-El v. Brennan, No. CA-93-3868-WN (D. Md. Oct. 3, 1993); see Hamlin v. Warren, 664 F.2d 29, 32 (4th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 911 (1982). 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