Arnold v. Marles
This text of Arnold v. Marles (Arnold v. Marles) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-8114
JAMES GUY ARNOLD, IV,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
CHARLES MARLES, Sheriff; MARTIN VAN EVANS,
Respondents - Appellees.
No. 02-6168
JAMES GUY ARNOLD,
MARTIN VAN EVANS, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, Chief District Judge; Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-01-3567-S, CA-01-4026-AMD)
Submitted: April 25, 2002 Decided: May 6, 2002 Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Guy Arnold, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
James Guy Arnold appeals the district court orders denying
relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petitions in these
consolidated cases. We find Arnold’s appeals to be moot.
Accordingly, we deny certificates of appealability and dismiss the
appeals. Further, we deny Arnold’s motion to proceed in forma
pauperis on 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
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Arnold v. Marles, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arnold-v-marles-ca4-2002.