Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Fields v. Smith, 95-8529 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-8529 Visitors: 33
Filed: May 02, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-8529 MERRILL E. FIELDS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIAM SMITH, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-95-2864-H) Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: May 2, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-8529 MERRILL E. FIELDS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WILLIAM SMITH, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-95-2864-H) Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: May 2, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Merrill E. Fields, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Richard Bruce Rosenblatt, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to ap- peal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Fields v. Smith, No. CA-95-2864-H (D. Md. Nov. 28, 1995). We deny Appellant's motion to appoint counsel and dispense with oral argu- ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre- sented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2
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