Filed: Oct. 04, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6663 CHARLES DANTE PATTERSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CON MED; WARDEN OF BALTIMORE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District Judge. (1:15-cv-03303-JFM) Submitted: September 29, 2016 Decided: October 4, 2016 Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6663 CHARLES DANTE PATTERSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CON MED; WARDEN OF BALTIMORE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District Judge. (1:15-cv-03303-JFM) Submitted: September 29, 2016 Decided: October 4, 2016 Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6663
CHARLES DANTE PATTERSON, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CON MED; WARDEN OF BALTIMORE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (1:15-cv-03303-JFM)
Submitted: September 29, 2016 Decided: October 4, 2016
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles Dante Patterson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Eric Matthew
Rigatuso, ECCLESTON & WOLF, PC, Hanover, Maryland; Jordan Vernon
Watts, Jr., BALTIMORE COUNTY OFFICE OF LAW, Towson, Maryland,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles Dante Patterson, Jr., 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 deny Patterson’s motion to appoint counsel and
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Patterson
v. Con Med, No. 1:15-cv-03303-JFM (D. Md. Apr. 28, 2016). 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