Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Abu-Shabazz v. Sondervan, 04-6361 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-6361 Visitors: 19
Filed: May 20, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6361 AKBAR SHARRIF ABU-SHABAZZ, a/k/a Charles2 x Cox, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM W. SONDERVAN, Commissioner; ROBERT J. KUPEC, ECI Warden; GEORGE KALOROUMAKIS, ECI Assistant Warden; RONALD B. DRYDEN, ECI Chief of Security; CHRIS TYLER, Administrative Aide; GENE HOWE, ECI ARC Officer; ROBERT HUTCHINSON, MHC Warden; JOSEPH P. SACCHET, MHC Warden; PRISON HEALTH SERVICE, INCORPORATED; R. KNORR, RCI Protestant Chaplain
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6361 AKBAR SHARRIF ABU-SHABAZZ, a/k/a Charles2 x Cox, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM W. SONDERVAN, Commissioner; ROBERT J. KUPEC, ECI Warden; GEORGE KALOROUMAKIS, ECI Assistant Warden; RONALD B. DRYDEN, ECI Chief of Security; CHRIS TYLER, Administrative Aide; GENE HOWE, ECI ARC Officer; ROBERT HUTCHINSON, MHC Warden; JOSEPH P. SACCHET, MHC Warden; PRISON HEALTH SERVICE, INCORPORATED; R. KNORR, RCI Protestant Chaplain; DOCTOR BERGMAN, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-1012-8-AW) Submitted: May 13, 2004 Decided: May 20, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Akbar Sharrif Abu-Shabazz, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Glenn William Bell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland; Donald Joseph Crawford, ALDELMAN, SHEFF & SMITH, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Akbar Sharrif Abu-Shabazz appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Abu-Shabazz v. Sondervan, No. CA-03-1012-8-AW (D. Md. filed Feb. 17, 2004 & entered Feb. 18, 2004). 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 - 3 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer