Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Johnson v. Keckler, 96-6236 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6236 Visitors: 5
Filed: May 07, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6236 FRANK JOHNSON, a Former Undercover Agent of the State Attorney's Office of Allegheny County, Maryland, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus N.T.F. TROOPER KECKLER, Individually and Offi- cial Capacity, State Police Officer/Barrack-B; N.T.F. TROOPER UPDEGRAFFEE, Individually and Official Capacity, State Police/Barrack-B; BARRY LEVINE, Individually and Official Capac- ity as a State Attorney for the State Attorney Office of All
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-6236 FRANK JOHNSON, a Former Undercover Agent of the State Attorney's Office of Allegheny County, Maryland, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus N.T.F. TROOPER KECKLER, Individually and Offi- cial Capacity, State Police Officer/Barrack-B; N.T.F. TROOPER UPDEGRAFFEE, Individually and Official Capacity, State Police/Barrack-B; BARRY LEVINE, Individually and Official Capac- ity as a State Attorney for the State Attorney Office of Allegheny County, Maryland; KENNETH LONG, JR., Individually and Official Capacity as a State Attorney for Washington County, Maryland; OFFICE OF THE STATE ATTORNEY FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND; OFFICE OF THE STATE ATTORNEY FOR ALLEGHENY COUNTY, MARYLAND, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 95-274-CCB) Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: May 7, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frank Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Holdsworth Bowen, Assistant Attorney General, Betty Stemley Sconion, Assistant Attorney Gen- eral, Pikesville, Maryland; Daniel Karp, Kevin Bock Karpinski, ALLEN, JOHNSON, ALEXANDER & KARP, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 (1988) 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. Johnson v. Keckler, No. CA-95-274-CCB (D. Md. Jan. 11, 1996). 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