The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
01-6299•Zachary Williams v. Frederick Menifee
01-6299Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 15, 2001
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-6299
ZACHARY WILLIAMS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
FREDERICK MENIFEE; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE
STATE OF MARYLAND,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA-
00-3504-CCB)
Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: October 15, 2001
Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Zachary Williams, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., At-
torney General, Mary Ann Rapp Ince, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).
-- 1 of 2 --
* This case was placed in abeyance pending our decision in
Atkinson v. Angelone, No. 00-6187, 2001 WL 1020287 (4th Cir.
Sept. 6, 2001) (unpublished).
2
PER CURIAM:
Zachary Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s orders
denying his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &
Supp. 2001), as untimely filed and denying his motions filed under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and the dis-
trict court’s opinions and find no reversible error. * Accordingly,
we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on
the reasoning of the district court. Williams v. Menifee, No. CA-
00-3504-CCB (D. Md. filed Feb. 1, 2001 & entered Feb. 2, 2001;
filed Feb. 7, 2001 & entered Feb. 8, 2001; Feb. 14, 2001). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.