Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

30 F.3d 128

Docket No. 94-6461.

Bowman v. Beshears

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted: June 23, 1994 Decided: July 25, 1994.

This page is marked noindex.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1994-07-25

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 2017

2 federal appellate ·

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Daniel T. Brashear v. William D. Schaeffer Executive Director of the Governor's Office of Justice Assistance Bishop L. Robinson Paul J. Davis Richard A. Lanham Director, Public Justice Center Commutation Project Director, House of Ruth, Incorporated of Baltimore, Maryland Joseph J. Curran, Daniel T. Brashear v. William D. Schaeffer, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Governor of the State of Maryland and His Heirs or Successors Joseph J. Curran, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Attorney General for the State of Maryland and His Heirs or Successors

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1994-07-25

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA-94-71-S)

Darrell A. Bowman, Appellant Pro Se.

Thomas Kevin Clancy, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

D.Md.

DISMISSED.

Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Bowman v. Beshears, No. CA-94-71-S (D. Md. Mar. 25, 1994).* 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

*

We deny Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel

/30/f3d/128 · .json · Public domain