Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    The document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit from 1994. It affirms the lower district court's denial of relief to the Appellant, William Brown, in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without merit. The Fourth Circuit found that the appeal was without merit based on its review of the record and reasoning of the district court's opinion. The Fourth Circuit affirmed and dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1994-08-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 35 F.3d 555 Docket: 94-6694

    Original Title

    William Christopher Brown v. Brandetta Ross B.J. Jones Maryland Parole Commission Paul A. Davis Clair S. Nordeck Queen E. Stoops John F. Himmel, Jr. William L. Smith, Warden Richard A. Lanham, III Bishop L. Robinson, 35 F.3d 555, 4th Cir. (1994)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit from 1994. It affirms the lower district court's denial of relief to the Appellant, William Brown, in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without merit. The Fourth Circuit found that the appeal was without merit based on its review of the record and reasoning of the district court's opinion. The Fourth Circuit affirmed and dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    0 views2 pages

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The document is a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit from 1994. It affirms the lower district court's denial of relief to the Appellant, William Brown, in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without merit. The Fourth Circuit found that the appeal was without merit based on its review of the record and reasoning of the district court's opinion. The Fourth Circuit affirmed and dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    35 F.

    3d 555

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    William Christopher BROWN, Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    Brandetta ROSS; B.J. Jones; Maryland Parole Commission;
    Paul A. Davis; Clair S. Nordeck; Queen E. Stoops; John F.
    Himmel, Jr.; William L. Smith, Warden; Richard A. Lanham,
    III; Bishop L. Robinson, Defendants Appellees.
    No. 94-6694.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted July 19, 1994.
    Decided August 18, 1994.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,
    at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-124-H).
    William Christopher Brown, Appellant Pro Se.
    John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Glenn William Bell, Office of
    the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, for Appellees.
    D.Md.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before HALL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
    Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. Our review of the record and the district court's

    opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on


    the reasoning of the district court. Brown v. Ross, No. CA-94-124-H (D. Md.
    June 7, 1994). 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

    You might also like