Filed: Oct. 23, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6140 AARON HOLSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM L. SMITH, Individually and as Warden; ALLYSON GOLSON, Individually and as Classifi- cation Counselor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-1514-K) Submitted: October 17, 1996 Decided: October 23, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6140 AARON HOLSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM L. SMITH, Individually and as Warden; ALLYSON GOLSON, Individually and as Classifi- cation Counselor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-1514-K) Submitted: October 17, 1996 Decided: October 23, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges,..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6140 AARON HOLSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM L. SMITH, Individually and as Warden; ALLYSON GOLSON, Individually and as Classifi- cation Counselor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-1514-K) Submitted: October 17, 1996 Decided: October 23, 1996 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Aaron Holsey, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1994) complaint. 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. Smith, No. CA-94-1514-K (D. Md. Dec. 21, 1995). 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