Tasker v. Maryland
This text of 517 F. App'x 172 (Tasker v. 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.
Opinion
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
James E. Tasker appeals the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition as untimely. Although the district court granted a certificate of ap-pealability on the issue of whether the petition was timely filed, we confine our review on appeal to the issues raised in Tasker’s informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Tasker’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, he has waived appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we deny Tasker’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm the district court’s order. Tasker v. Maryland, No. 11-cv-1869, 2013 WL 425040 (D.Md. Jan. 31, 2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
517 F. App'x 172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tasker-v-maryland-ca4-2013.