Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Holsey v. Davis, 97-7669 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-7669 Visitors: 24
Filed: Nov. 03, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7669 AARON HOLSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PAUL DAVIS, Individually and as Chairperson of the Maryland Parole Board; BLOUNT, Individ- ually and as Commissioner with the Parole Commission; MARYLAND PAROLE COMMISSION; MARY- LAND DIVISION OF CORRECTION-PERSONNEL AND OFFICIALS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7669 AARON HOLSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PAUL DAVIS, Individually and as Chairperson of the Maryland Parole Board; BLOUNT, Individ- ually and as Commissioner with the Parole Commission; MARYLAND PAROLE COMMISSION; MARY- LAND DIVISION OF CORRECTION-PERSONNEL AND OFFICIALS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-3989-JFM) Submitted: October 20, 1998 Decided: November 3, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aaron Holsey, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Wendy Ann Kronmiller, Assistant Attorney General, Balti- more, Maryland; Susan Lynn Howe, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Aaron Holsey appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Holsey v. Davis, No. CA-96-3989-JFM (D. Md. Sept. 9 and Oct. 9, 1997). 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