Younie v. Kupec, 4th Cir. (2000)

Download as pdf
Download as pdf
You are on page 1of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-7063

WALTER ALBERT YOUNIE,


Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
ROBERT KUPEC, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE
STATE OF MARYLAND,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-001964-AMD)

Submitted:

September 21, 2000

Decided:

September 29, 2000

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Walter Albert Younie, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:
Walter Albert Younie seeks to appeal the district courts
orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A.
2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000) and denying his motion for
reconsideration.

We have reviewed the record and the district

courts opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny


a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the
See Younie v. Kupec, No. CA-00-

reasoning of the district court.

1964-AMD (D. Md. July 3 & July 13, 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

Although the district courts order is marked as filed on


July 12, 2000, the district courts records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on July 13, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 58
and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date
that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the
effective date of the district courts decision. See Wilson v.
Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
2

You might also like