Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Martin v. Corcoran, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    Lenroy Martin appealed the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. As such, the appeals court denied Martin a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Martin was not entitled to habeas corpus relief.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2000-03-29 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 99-7212

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Lenroy Martin appealed the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. As such, the appeals court denied Martin a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Martin was not entitled to habeas corpus relief.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    10 views2 pages

    Martin v. Corcoran, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Lenroy Martin appealed the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. As such, the appeals court denied Martin a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning that Martin was not entitled to habeas corpus relief.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 99-7212

    LENROY MARTIN,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    THOMAS R. CORCORAN; J. JOSEPH CURRAN, JR.,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA99-198-PJM)

    Submitted:

    March 23, 2000

    Decided:

    March 29, 2000

    Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Lenroy Martin, Appellant Pro Se.
    John Joseph Curran, Jr., Ann
    Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Lenroy Martin seeks to appeal the district courts order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. 2254 (West
    1994 & Supp. 1999).

    We have reviewed the record and the district

    courts opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny


    a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.

    See Martin v. Corcoran, No. CA-99-

    198-PJM (D. Md. Aug. 11, 1999).*

    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

    Although the district courts order is marked as filed on


    August 10, 1999, the district courts records show that it was
    entered on the docket sheet on August 11, 1999. Pursuant to Rules
    58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the
    date the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the
    effective date of the district courts decision. See Wilson v.
    Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
    2

    You might also like