What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals. Your task is to identify what party initiated the appeal. For cases with cross appeals or multiple docket numbers, if the opinion does not explicitly indicate which appeal was filed first, assumes that the first litigant listed as the "appellant" or "petitioner" was the first to file the appeal. In federal habeas corpus petitions, consider the prisoner to be the plaintiff.

Opinion:
HOBBS v. SWENSON
No. 6481.
United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.
Argued Oct. 6, 1952.
Decided Oct. 8, 1952.
Joseph Hobbs, Jr., pro se.
Ambrose T. Hartman, Sp. Asst. At'ty. Gen. of Maryland, (Hall Hammond, Atty. Gen. of Maryland, on brief), for appellee.
Before PARKER, Chief Judge, and SO-PER and DOBIE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. O-n January 7, 1947 appellant pleaded-guilty in a Maryland state court to a charge of robbery and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment. He contends that counsel were not appointed to advise him, that he was not allowed to present witnesses in his behalf and that he was not allowed to question the -witnesses against him. Appellant has repeatedly made application for habeas corpus to the state courts which have been denied and the Supreme Court of the United States .has denied certiorari. State ex rel. Hobbs v. Warden, Md., 70 A.2d 814, Hobbs v. Warden, Md., 80 A.2d 38, Id., 341 U.S. 936, 71 S.Ct. 851, 95 L.Ed. 1364. It appears also that prior applications have been made to both United States Judges in the District of Maryland and have been denied by them. The application from the denial of which this appeal was taken presents no- such unusual circumstances as would have warranted the District Judge in issuing a writ of habeas corpus in such situation. The application appears . to be entirely without merit; but we are without jurisdiction to consider the appeal because there is no certificate of probable cause as required by 28 U.S.C.A. § 2253. Bernard v. Brady, Warden, 4 Cir., 164 F.2d 881; Berman v. Swenson, Warden, 4 Cir., 177 F.2d 717; Hansen v. Warden, 4 Cir., 198 F.2d 470.
Appeal dismissed.

Question: What party initiated the appeal?

Choices:
Original plaintiff
Original defendant
Federal agency representing plaintiff
Federal agency representing defendant
Intervenor
Not applicable
Not ascertained

Answer: 1