COPES v. CLEM, 13-6599. (2013)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20130904116
Visitors: 27
Filed: Sep. 04, 2013
Latest Update: Sep. 04, 2013
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM. Randolph Copes appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Copes v. Clem, No. 1:12-cv-00441-JFM (D. Md. Mar. 13, 2013). We deny Copes' motion for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal c
Summary: UNPUBLISHED Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM. Randolph Copes appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Copes v. Clem, No. 1:12-cv-00441-JFM (D. Md. Mar. 13, 2013). We deny Copes' motion for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal co..
More
UNPUBLISHED
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM.
Randolph Copes appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Copes v. Clem, No. 1:12-cv-00441-JFM (D. Md. Mar. 13, 2013). We deny Copes' motion for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
Source: Leagle
