Benoit Tshiwala v. Gregg Hershberger

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:09-cv-02232-AW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998756664].. [10-7455]

Download PDF
Appeal: 10-7455 Document: 27 Date Filed: 01/04/2012 Page: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7455 BENOIT TSHIWALA, Petitioner - Appellant, v. GREGG HERSHBERGER, Warden; DOUGLAS General of the State of Maryland, F. GANSLER, Attorney Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:09-cv-02232-AW) Submitted: December 20, 2011 Decided: January 4, 2012 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gary Eugene Bair, BENNETT & BAIR, LLC, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Edward John Kelley, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 10-7455 Document: 27 Date Filed: 01/04/2012 Page: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Benoit Tshiwala appeals the district court’s order denying relief on the Fourth Amendment claims he raised in his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. ∗ and find no reversible error. We have reviewed the record Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Tshiwala v. Hershberger, No. 8:09-cv-02232-AW (D. Md. Sept. 15, 2010). We dispense with oral contentions argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before the court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED ∗ We previously granted a certificate of appealability as to Tshiwala’s Fourth Amendment claims and denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal as to all remaining claims. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?