Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Iko v. Corcoran, 97-7828 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-7828 Visitors: 11
Filed: Sep. 22, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7828 IFEANYI ANYIM IKO, a/k/a Andy Iko, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THOMAS R. CORCORAN; J. JOSEPH CURRAN, JR., Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 97-2083-DKC) Submitted: September 10, 1998 Decided: September 22, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curi
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7828 IFEANYI ANYIM IKO, a/k/a Andy Iko, Petitioner - Appellant, versus THOMAS R. CORCORAN; J. JOSEPH CURRAN, JR., Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 97-2083-DKC) Submitted: September 10, 1998 Decided: September 22, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ifeanyi Anyim Iko, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., At- torney General, Ann Norman Bosse, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 declining to grant relief from its order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a cer- tificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Iko v. Corcoran, No. CA-97-2083-DKC (D. Md. Nov. 19, 1997). Appellant’s motion for “consolidation and joinder” is denied. 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
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