Filed: May 15, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7796 RICHARD LEWIS BECKWITH, Petitioner - Appellant, versus BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden; STEVEN FINGER; TAMMIE J. HART; MARY J. BRIGHT; VICKI JOHNSON; JOHN/JANE DOE, 1-10, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-02-1907-AW) Submitted: April 22, 2003 Decided: May 15, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Ci
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7796 RICHARD LEWIS BECKWITH, Petitioner - Appellant, versus BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden; STEVEN FINGER; TAMMIE J. HART; MARY J. BRIGHT; VICKI JOHNSON; JOHN/JANE DOE, 1-10, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-02-1907-AW) Submitted: April 22, 2003 Decided: May 15, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Cir..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7796 RICHARD LEWIS BECKWITH, Petitioner - Appellant, versus BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden; STEVEN FINGER; TAMMIE J. HART; MARY J. BRIGHT; VICKI JOHNSON; JOHN/JANE DOE, 1-10, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-02-1907-AW) Submitted: April 22, 2003 Decided: May 15, 2003 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard Lewis Beckwith, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Michael DiBiagio, United States Attorney, Allen F. Loucks, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Richard Lewis Beckwith appeals the district court’s order denying his petition for a writ of mandamus. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Beckwith v. Shearin, No. CA-02-1907-AW (D. Md. filed Oct. 28, 2002 & entered Oct. 29, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2