Patrick Edward Quinn v. William L. Smith, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland

Fourth Circuit

Patrick Edward Quinn v. William L. Smith, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland

60 F.3d 824, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24888, 1995 WL 419220

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJuly 13, 1995

Docket95-6554

StatusPublished

This text of 60 F.3d 824 (Patrick Edward Quinn 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

Patrick Edward Quinn v. William L. Smith, Warden Attorney General of the State of Maryland, 60 F.3d 824, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24888, 1995 WL 419220 (4th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

60 F.3d 824
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Patrick Edward QUINN, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
William L. SMITH, Warden; Attorney General of The State of
Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 95-6554.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 22, 1995.
Decided: July 13, 1995.

Patrick Edward Quinn, Appellant Pro Se.

John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Tarra R. DeShields-Minnis, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, for Appellees.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before HALL, MURNAGHAN, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying him an extension of time in which to file a notice of appeal from a previous order that denied Appellant's 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. Quinn v. Smith, No. CA-94-1515-HAR (D.Md. Mar. 8, 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.

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

60 F.3d 824
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished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.

Patrick Edward QUINN, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
William L. SMITH, Warden; Attorney General of The State of
Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 95-6554.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 22, 1995.
Decided: July 13, 1995.

Patrick Edward Quinn, Appellant Pro Se.

John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Tarra R. DeShields-Minnis, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, for Appellees.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before HALL, MURNAGHAN, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying him an extension of time in which to file a notice of appeal from a previous order that denied Appellant's 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. Quinn v. Smith, No. CA-94-1515-HAR (D.Md. Mar. 8, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 F.3d 824, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24888, 1995 WL 419220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patrick-edward-quinn-v-william-l-smith-warden-atto-ca4-1995.