Clifford Hinds-Bey v. Ronald F. Moats, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland

Fourth Circuit

Clifford Hinds-Bey v. Ronald F. Moats, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland

59 F.3d 166, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23409, 1995 WL 375872

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 26, 1995

Docket95-6260

StatusPublished

This text of 59 F.3d 166 (Clifford Hinds-Bey v. Ronald F. Moats, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland) 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.

Bluebook

Clifford Hinds-Bey v. Ronald F. Moats, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland, 59 F.3d 166, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23409, 1995 WL 375872 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

59 F.3d 166
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Clifford HINDS-BEY, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Ronald F. MOATS, Warden; Attorney General of The State of
Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 95-6260.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 18, 1995.
Decided June 26, 1995.

Clifford Hinds-Bey, appellant pro se.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.* Hinds-Bey v. Moats, No. CA-94-3512-S (D. Md. Feb. 7, 1995). 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

*

Appellant's allegation of bias on the part of the district court is without merit

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

59 F.3d 166
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Clifford HINDS-BEY, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Ronald F. MOATS, Warden; Attorney General of The State of
Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 95-6260.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 18, 1995.
Decided June 26, 1995.

Clifford Hinds-Bey, appellant pro se.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.* Hinds-Bey v. Moats, No. CA-94-3512-S (D. Md. Feb. 7, 1995). 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

*

Appellant's allegation of bias on the part of the district court is without merit

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 F.3d 166, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23409, 1995 WL 375872, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clifford-hinds-bey-v-ronald-f-moats-warden-attorne-ca4-1995.