Filed: May 29, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6097 BILLY G. ASEMANI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LOIS I. FISHER, Chief Attorney; NANCY S. FORSTER, Chief Public Defender; COLLATERAL REVIEW DIVISION OF THE OPD, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:08-cv-03272-RDB) Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 29, 2009 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Aff
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6097 BILLY G. ASEMANI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LOIS I. FISHER, Chief Attorney; NANCY S. FORSTER, Chief Public Defender; COLLATERAL REVIEW DIVISION OF THE OPD, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:08-cv-03272-RDB) Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 29, 2009 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6097 BILLY G. ASEMANI, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LOIS I. FISHER, Chief Attorney; NANCY S. FORSTER, Chief Public Defender; COLLATERAL REVIEW DIVISION OF THE OPD, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:08-cv-03272-RDB) Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: May 29, 2009 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Billy G. Asemani, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Billy G. Asemani appeals the district court’s order dismissing a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action complaining that Defendants will not authorize funds to pay for an expert witness that Asemani deems essential to his state post-conviction case. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Asemani v. Fisher, No. 1:08-cv-03272-RDB (D. Md. filed Dec. 15, 2008, entered Dec. 16, 2008). 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 2
