U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2000

Bolling v. Conroy

Bolling v. Conroy
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided May 18, 2000

Bolling v. Conroy

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6442

JERMAINE A. BOLLING, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

PATRICK CONROY, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CA-99-3810-JFM)

Submitted: May 11, 2000 Decided: May 18, 2000

Before MURNAGHAN, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jermaine A. Bolling, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Ann Norman Bosse, Jason Frederick Trumpbour, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Jermaine A. Bolling seeks to appeal the district court’s 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 court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the rea- soning of the district court. See Bolling v. Conroy, No. CA-99- 3810-JFM (D. Md. Mar. 24, 2000). 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.