Edward E. Allen v. Manfred F. Maass

Good Law
12 F.3d 1105·1993 WL 501582·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 36459
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 3, 199393-35374California459 words

Opinion

Opinion

12 F.3d 1105 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Edward E. ALLEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Manfred F. MAASS, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-35374. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 17, 1993. * Decided Dec. 3, 1993. Before: SCHROEDER, D.W. NELSON, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Edward Allen appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 petition for habeas corpus with prejudice. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . We review de novo, Thomas v. Lewis, 945 F.2d 1119, 1122 (9th Cir.1991), and affirm. 3 On June 1, 1991, Allen was sentenced to five years probation on four counts of issuing false financial statements with the requirement that he serve six months imprisonment on each of the four convictions. The sentences were to be served consecutively. Allen received 51 days of presentence credit for the jailtime he served prior to his conviction. 4 Allen contends that each of his…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.