Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Kenneth G. Dodek v. Officer Drake, Co II (Urine Tester) Mr. Williams (Hearing Officer), 88-6607 (1989)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 88-6607 Visitors: 51
Filed: Nov. 16, 1989
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 891 F.2d 286 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Kenneth G. DODEK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Officer DRAKE, CO II (Urine Tester) Mr. Williams (Hearing Officer), Defendants-Appellees. No. 88-6607. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: Sept. 20, 1989. Decided: N
More

891 F.2d 286

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Kenneth G. DODEK, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Officer DRAKE, CO II (Urine Tester) Mr. Williams (Hearing
Officer), Defendants-Appellees.

No. 88-6607.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Sept. 20, 1989.
Decided: Nov. 16, 1989.

Kenneth G. Dodek, appellant pro se.

Before K.K. HALL and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Kenneth G. Dodek appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Dodek was convicted of a prison disciplinary infraction because results of the EMIT drug test revealed the presence of marijuana in his urine. In his complaint, Dodek contended that the use of the EMIT test results violated his constitutional rights. Our decision in Thompson v. Hall, No. 88-6525 (4th Cir. Aug. 14, 1989) (unpublished), is dispositive of the issue. Thompson specifically held "that the EMIT test, scientifically recognized as a valid medical procedure, constitutes some evidence to support the imposition of disciplinary sanctions." Id., slip op. at 7.

2

As the dispositive issues recently has been decided authoritatively, we dispense with oral argument. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

3

AFFIRMED.

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