Filed: Jul. 18, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6504 BENJAMIN ASHLEY GARDNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DOUGLAS DEVENYNS, Director of Talbot County Detention Center, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:11-cv-02725-JKB) Submitted: July 2, 2012 Decided: July 18, 2012 Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Benjamin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6504 BENJAMIN ASHLEY GARDNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DOUGLAS DEVENYNS, Director of Talbot County Detention Center, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:11-cv-02725-JKB) Submitted: July 2, 2012 Decided: July 18, 2012 Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Benjamin ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6504 BENJAMIN ASHLEY GARDNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DOUGLAS DEVENYNS, Director of Talbot County Detention Center, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:11-cv-02725-JKB) Submitted: July 2, 2012 Decided: July 18, 2012 Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Benjamin Ashley Gardner, Appellant Pro Se. Kevin Bock Karpinski, KARPINSKI, COLARESI & KARP, PA, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Benjamin Ashley Gardner appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Gardner v. Devenyns, No. 1:11-cv-02725-JKB (D. Md. Mar. 2, 2012). 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
