Froeman v. Warden
Froeman v. Warden
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7050
GLENN A. FROEMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WARDEN, Baltimore County Detention Center, Towson; J. JOSEPH CURRAN, JR., Attorney Gen- eral of the State of Maryland; LILA NOBEL, Division of Parole and Probation; W. ROLAND KNAPP, Director, Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-96- 559-L)
Submitted: August 13, 1996 Decided: August 30, 1996 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Glenn A. Froeman, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., At- torney General, Tarra R. DeShields-Minnis, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Froeman appeals from the district court's marginal order deny- ing his motion for injunctive relief. We dismiss.
The district court properly denied injunctive relief. Federal courts may not award declaratory or injunctive relief that would affect pending state criminal proceedings absent extraordinary circumstances involving federally protected rights. Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 41 (1971). The record shows that Froeman was still seeking relief in the state appellate courts when the dis- trict court denied his motions for injunctive relief. See Huffman v. Pursue, Ltd., 420 U.S. 592, 608 (1975). Furthermore, there are no extenuating circumstances in this case entitling Froeman to injunctive relief.
We deny a certificate of appealability and 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
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.