Englehart v. Raikey

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

February 28, 1994     [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ___________________

No. 93-1985

WILLIAM F. ENGLEHART,

                                     Petitioner,

                                          v.

                         PAUL RAIKEY, WARDEN M.C.I. WALPOLE,

                                     Respondent.

__________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                       [Hon. Mark L. Wolf, U.S. District Judge]
                                           ___________________

                                 ___________________

                                        Before

                             Torruella, Boudin and Stahl,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ___________________

               William F. Englehar on brief pro se.
               ___________________
               Scott   Harshbarger,  Attorney   General,  and   William  J.
               ___________________                              ___________
          Duensing, Assitant Attorney General, on brief for appellee.
          ________

__________________

                                  __________________

Per  Curiam.  For  the reasons stated  in the memorandum
                 ___________

            and  order  of  the  United States  District  Court  for  the

            District of Massachusetts,  dated May 24, 1993,  the judgment

            of  the  court denying  the  petition  for habeas  corpus  is

            affirmed.
            ________

-2-