Filed: Nov. 23, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7341 WILLIAM JAMISON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF MARYLAND; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE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-98-838-H) Submitted: November 5, 1998 Decided: November 23, 1998 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam o
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7341 WILLIAM JAMISON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF MARYLAND; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE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-98-838-H) Submitted: November 5, 1998 Decided: November 23, 1998 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam op..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-7341
WILLIAM JAMISON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
STATE OF MARYLAND; 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-98-838-H)
Submitted: November 5, 1998 Decided: November 23, 1998
Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Jamison, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attor-
ney General, Gwynn X. Kinsey, Jr., Assistant Attorney General,
David Jonathan Taube, Assistant Attorney 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
William Jamison seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West
1994 & Supp. 1998). We find that Jamison’s petition was not timely
filed in the district court. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244(d) (West Supp.
1998); Brown v. Angelone,
150 F.3d 370, 374-76 (4th Cir. 1998).
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the
appeal. 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