SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES JAMES L. MARTIN

92–5584	v.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF

APPEALS et al.

JAMES L. MARTIN

92–5618	v.

CHRISTINE McDERMOTT et al.

on motions of petitioner for leave to proceed

in forma pauperis

Nos. 92–5584 and 92–5618. Decided November 2, 1992

Justice Stevens, with whom Justice Blackmun joins, dissenting.

In my opinion the judicial resources of the Court could be used more effectively by simply denying Martin's petitions than by drafting, entering, and policing the order the Court enters today. The theoretical administrative benefit the Court may derive from an order of this kind is far outweighed by the shadow it casts on the great tradition of open access that characterized the Court's history prior to its unprecedented decisions in In re McDonald, 489 U. S. 180 (1989) (per curiam) and In re Sindram, 498 U. S. 177 (1991) (per curiam). I continue to adhere to the views expressed in the dissenting opinions filed in those cases, and in the dissenting opinion I filed in Zatko v. California, 502 U. S. –––, ––– (1991) (per curiam). See also Talamini v. Allstate Insurance Co., 470 U. S. 1067 (1985), app. dism'd (Stevens, J., concurring).