Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

90-6384 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-6384 Visitors: 42
Filed: Nov. 14, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 918 F.2d 173 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Aaron HOLSEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. W.A. FULLER, Individually and as a Correctional Officer CO II, assigned to the 8 a.m. - 4 p.m. Shift at the Maryland Correctional Institution located at Washington Coun
More

918 F.2d 173
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Aaron HOLSEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
W.A. FULLER, Individually and as a Correctional Officer CO
II, assigned to the 8 a.m. - 4 p.m. Shift at the Maryland
Correctional Institution located at Washington County,
Maryland, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 90-6384.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 18, 1990.
Decided Nov. 14, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CA-82-1832-K)

Aaron Holsey, appellant pro se.

Ronald Mark Levitan, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Md., for appellee.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before SPROUSE and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Aaron Holsey appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Holsey v. Fuller, CA-82-1832-K (D.Md. Aug. 2, 1990). The motion for appointment of counsel is denied. 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.

2

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