Filed: Oct. 26, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6989 MALCOM MAXWELL RYIDU, a/k/a Richard Edward Janey, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WESTERN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; JON P. GALLEY, Warden; BRUCE A. LILLER, Psychology Associate II, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-51-H) Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 26, 2001 Before MOTZ and GRE
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6989 MALCOM MAXWELL RYIDU, a/k/a Richard Edward Janey, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WESTERN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; JON P. GALLEY, Warden; BRUCE A. LILLER, Psychology Associate II, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-51-H) Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 26, 2001 Before MOTZ and GREG..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6989 MALCOM MAXWELL RYIDU, a/k/a Richard Edward Janey, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WESTERN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; JON P. GALLEY, Warden; BRUCE A. LILLER, Psychology Associate II, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-51-H) Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 26, 2001 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Malcom Maxwell Ryidu, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Gloria Wilson Shelton, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Malcolm Maxwell Ryidu appeals the district court’s order de- nying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) 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. Ryidu v. Western Corr. Inst., No. CA-01-51- H (D. Md. May 30, 2001). 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