Murray v. Gee

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Murray v. Gee

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6227

RENARD TYRONE MURRAY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

ARCHIE GEE, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-96-2170-AW)

Submitted: June 24, 1997 Decided: September 16, 1997

Before MURNAGHAN, HAMILTON, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Renard Tyrone Murray, Appellant Pro Se. 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Renard Tyrone Murray appeals from the district court's denial

of his

28 U.S.C.A. § 2254

(West 1994 & Supp. 1997) motion. We

dismiss.

Murray contends that the magistrate judge and district court

erred in denying his motion under § 2254(d) because he was never given a full and fair hearing on the facts by the state court on

the issue of whether his attorney was ineffective for failing to

pursue a motion to dismiss for speedy trial violations. We find

that even assuming Murray's allegation to be true, he has failed to demonstrate prejudice under Hill v. Lockhart,

474 U.S. 52

(1985), because he has not shown a violation of either the Maryland Speedy

Trial Act or the speedy trial guarantee of the Sixth Amendment.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-

tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished