Scribd Logo
Hochladen

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4 views

    Leonard Francis Wheeler v. Ralph Packard, Warden, 862 F.2d 871, 4th Cir. (1988)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished appellate court decision from 1988 regarding a petitioner, Leonard Francis Wheeler, seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court had refused Wheeler's habeas petition. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. The appellate court adopted the reasoning of the district court in denying Wheeler's habeas petition.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    Leonard Francis Wheeler v. Ralph Packard, Warden, 862 F.2d 871, 4th Cir. (1988)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished appellate court decision from 1988 regarding a petitioner, Leonard Francis Wheeler, seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court had refused Wheeler's habeas petition. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. The appellate court adopted the reasoning of the district court in denying Wheeler's habeas petition.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1988-11-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 862 F.2d 871 Docket: 87-6655

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is an unpublished appellate court decision from 1988 regarding a petitioner, Leonard Francis Wheeler, seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court had refused Wheeler's habeas petition. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. The appellate court adopted the reasoning of the district court in denying Wheeler's habeas petition.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    4 views2 pages

    Leonard Francis Wheeler v. Ralph Packard, Warden, 862 F.2d 871, 4th Cir. (1988)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished appellate court decision from 1988 regarding a petitioner, Leonard Francis Wheeler, seeking habeas corpus relief. The district court had refused Wheeler's habeas petition. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding the appeal was without merit. The appellate court adopted the reasoning of the district court in denying Wheeler's habeas petition.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    862 F.

    2d 871
    Unpublished Disposition

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    Leonard Francis WHEELER, Petitioner-Appellant,
    v.
    Ralph PACKARD, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 87-6655.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: July 28, 1988.
    Decided: Nov. 14, 1988.

    Leonard Francis Wheeler, appellant pro se.


    Norman L. Smith (Office of the Attorney General of Maryland), for
    appellee.
    Before K.K. HALL and ERVIN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Leonard Francis Wheeler appeals from the district court's order refusing habeas
    corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254. Our review of the record and the
    district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate
    discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the
    reasoning of the district court. Wheeler v. Packard, C/A No. 86-3696-R (D.Md.
    Sept. 30, 1987). 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.
    AFFIRMED.

    You might also like