Filed: Dec. 23, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7214 JAMES MAXWELL GIBSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. J. MICHAEL STOUFFER, Former Commissioner of Corrections; GREGG L. HERSHBERGER, Warden; KATHLEEN GREEN, Warden; DENNIS JOHNSON, Lieutenant; FRANK B. BISHOP, Warden; THOMAS PARKER, Sergeant; UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:13-cv-020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7214 JAMES MAXWELL GIBSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. J. MICHAEL STOUFFER, Former Commissioner of Corrections; GREGG L. HERSHBERGER, Warden; KATHLEEN GREEN, Warden; DENNIS JOHNSON, Lieutenant; FRANK B. BISHOP, Warden; THOMAS PARKER, Sergeant; UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:13-cv-0204..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7214
JAMES MAXWELL GIBSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
J. MICHAEL STOUFFER, Former Commissioner of Corrections;
GREGG L. HERSHBERGER, Warden; KATHLEEN GREEN, Warden; DENNIS
JOHNSON, Lieutenant; FRANK B. BISHOP, Warden; THOMAS PARKER,
Sergeant; UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge.
(1:13-cv-02040-GLR)
Submitted: December 18, 2014 Decided: December 23, 2014
Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Maxwell Gibson, Appellant Pro Se. Nichole Cherie
Gatewood, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James Maxwell Gibson appeals the district court’s
order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Gibson v. Stouffer, No. 1:13-cv-02040-GLR (D. Md. Aug.
6, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2