Filed: May 04, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6142 ROBERT MATTHEWS-BEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF MARYLAND; CHIEF OF SECURITY; JAMES B. MURPHY; OFFICER ANDREWS; SERGEANT DENNY; JOHN EVANS, State Trooper #1060, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 99-3092-DKC) Submitted: April 27, 2000 Decided: May 4, 2000 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6142 ROBERT MATTHEWS-BEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF MARYLAND; CHIEF OF SECURITY; JAMES B. MURPHY; OFFICER ANDREWS; SERGEANT DENNY; JOHN EVANS, State Trooper #1060, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 99-3092-DKC) Submitted: April 27, 2000 Decided: May 4, 2000 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Ju..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6142 ROBERT MATTHEWS-BEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF MARYLAND; CHIEF OF SECURITY; JAMES B. MURPHY; OFFICER ANDREWS; SERGEANT DENNY; JOHN EVANS, State Trooper #1060, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 99-3092-DKC) Submitted: April 27, 2000 Decided: May 4, 2000 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Matthews-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert Matthews-Bey appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Matthews-Bey v. Maryland, No. CA-99-3092- DKC (D. Md. Dec. 7, 1999). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
