Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Montague v. Conroy, 05-7064 (2006)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-7064 Visitors: 38
Filed: Sep. 08, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7064 HORACE MONTAGUE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICK CONROY, Warden, Maryland House of Correction-Annex; BURLIE FRINK, Head of Security, Maryland House of Correction-Annex; JOHN DOE, Head of Records, Maryland House of Correction-Annex, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-3191-AW) Submitted: Aug
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7064 HORACE MONTAGUE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICK CONROY, Warden, Maryland House of Correction-Annex; BURLIE FRINK, Head of Security, Maryland House of Correction-Annex; JOHN DOE, Head of Records, Maryland House of Correction-Annex, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-3191-AW) Submitted: August 23, 2006 Decided: September 8, 2006 Before WILKINSON, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bert Walter Kapinus, Hyattsville, Maryland, for Appellant. Glen William Bell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Horace Montague 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. Montague v. Conroy, No. CA-03-3191-AW (D. Md. June 17, 2005). 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 -
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