Filed: Feb. 20, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7634 MARK DAVID SWANN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM W. SONDERVAN, Commissioner of Cor- rections; ROBERT KUPEC, Warden, Eastern Cor- rectional Institution; GEORGE KALOROUMAKIS; RONALD DRYDEN; CAPTAIN FLAG; LIEUTENANT MATTHEWS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-00- 1705) Submitted: February 9, 2001 Decid
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7634 MARK DAVID SWANN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM W. SONDERVAN, Commissioner of Cor- rections; ROBERT KUPEC, Warden, Eastern Cor- rectional Institution; GEORGE KALOROUMAKIS; RONALD DRYDEN; CAPTAIN FLAG; LIEUTENANT MATTHEWS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-00- 1705) Submitted: February 9, 2001 Decide..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7634 MARK DAVID SWANN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM W. SONDERVAN, Commissioner of Cor- rections; ROBERT KUPEC, Warden, Eastern Cor- rectional Institution; GEORGE KALOROUMAKIS; RONALD DRYDEN; CAPTAIN FLAG; LIEUTENANT MATTHEWS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-00- 1705) Submitted: February 9, 2001 Decided: February 20, 2001 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark David Swann, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., At- torney General, Sharon Stanley Street, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Mark David Swann appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Swann v. Sondervan, No. CA-00-1705 (D. Md. Nov. 3, 2000). 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