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)
01-7545•Montro Lorell Tilghman v. JON P. GALLEY, Warden
01-7545Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 4, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7545
MONTRO LORELL TILGHMAN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
JON P. GALLEY, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR
THE STATE OF MARYLAND,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge.
(CA-00-2568-WMN)
Submitted: January 23, 2002 Decided: February 4, 2002
Before TRAXLER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Montro Lorell Tilghman, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,
Attorney 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Montro Lorell Tilghman seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254
(West 1994 & Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the dis-
trict court’s 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 Tilghman v. Galley, No.
CA-00-2568-WMN (D. Md. Aug. 15, 2001). We deny Tilghman’s motion
for 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.