Harvey P. Short v. William L. Smith, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland

Fourth Circuit

Harvey P. Short v. William L. Smith, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland

59 F.3d 167, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23466, 1995 WL 380665

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 27, 1995

Docket95-6385

StatusPublished

This text of 59 F.3d 167 (Harvey P. Short v. William L. Smith, 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

Harvey P. Short v. William L. Smith, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland, 59 F.3d 167, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23466, 1995 WL 380665 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

59 F.3d 167
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Harvey P. SHORT, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
William L. SMITH, Warden; Attorney General of the State of
Maryland, Respondents--Appellees.

No. 95-6385.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 27, 1995.

Harvey P. Short, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Ann Norman Bosse, Michelle Nicol Levister, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, MD, for Appellees.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal 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 deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Short v. Smith, No. CA-94-2668-H (D. Md. Feb. 9, 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.

DISMISSED.

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

59 F.3d 167
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished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.

Harvey P. SHORT, Petitioner--Appellant,
v.
William L. SMITH, Warden; Attorney General of the State of
Maryland, Respondents--Appellees.

No. 95-6385.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 27, 1995.

Harvey P. Short, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Ann Norman Bosse, Michelle Nicol Levister, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, MD, for Appellees.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal 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 deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Short v. Smith, No. CA-94-2668-H (D. Md. Feb. 9, 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.

DISMISSED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 F.3d 167, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23466, 1995 WL 380665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harvey-p-short-v-william-l-smith-warden-attorney-g-ca4-1995.