Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Ryidu-X v. MD Correctional, 02-6856 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-6856 Visitors: 4
Filed: Sep. 06, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6856 MALCOM MAXWELL RYIDU-X, a/k/a Richard Edward Janey, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARYLAND CORRECTIONAL ADJUSTMENT CENTER; THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Warden; C. LEAKS, Dietary Supervisor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-138) Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 6, 2002 Before WIDENER and
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6856 MALCOM MAXWELL RYIDU-X, a/k/a Richard Edward Janey, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARYLAND CORRECTIONAL ADJUSTMENT CENTER; THOMAS R. CORCORAN, Warden; C. LEAKS, Dietary Supervisor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-138) Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 6, 2002 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Malcom Maxwell Ryidu-X, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane Weber, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Malcom Maxwell Ryidu-X appeals from the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2002) 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. Ryidu-X v. Maryland Correctional Adjustment Ctr., No. CA-02-138 (D. Md. May 1, 2002). 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