Filed: Aug. 29, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6468 FRANCIS J. GREEN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus J. SHIMKO, Correction Officer II, Defendant - Appellee, and RONALD JONES, #292-378, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 00-2666-S) Submitted: August 23, 2001 Decided: August 29, 2001 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Aff
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6468 FRANCIS J. GREEN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus J. SHIMKO, Correction Officer II, Defendant - Appellee, and RONALD JONES, #292-378, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 00-2666-S) Submitted: August 23, 2001 Decided: August 29, 2001 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-6468
FRANCIS J. GREEN, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
J. SHIMKO, Correction Officer II,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
RONALD JONES, #292-378,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA-
00-2666-S)
Submitted: August 23, 2001 Decided: August 29, 2001
Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Francis J. Green, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,
Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney
General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Francis J. Green, Jr. appeals the district court’s order deny-
ing relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) 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. See Green v. Shimko, No. CA-00-2666-S (D.
Md. filed Feb. 12, 2001, entered Feb. 13, 2001). We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-
ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2