Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Buckner v. Governor of Maryland, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Robert Leon Buckner under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various Maryland state and local government defendants. The district court denied relief to Buckner, and the Fourth Circuit affirmed that decision, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Buckner's motion to appoint counsel and dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-04-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 95-7051

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Robert Leon Buckner under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various Maryland state and local government defendants. The district court denied relief to Buckner, and the Fourth Circuit affirmed that decision, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Buckner's motion to appoint counsel and dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Buckner v. Governor of Maryland, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Robert Leon Buckner under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various Maryland state and local government defendants. The district court denied relief to Buckner, and the Fourth Circuit affirmed that decision, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Buckner's motion to appoint counsel and dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 95-7051

    ROBERT LEON BUCKNER,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND; BALTIMORE
    COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; BALTIMORE CITY
    POLICE DEPARTMENT; ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY POLICE
    DEPARTMENT; BALTIMORE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT; ARCHIE GEE, Warden, Patuxent Institution; KEITH GREENE, Officer, DOC Office,
    Patuxent; JAMES M. DEAN, Warden, Baltimore
    County Detention Center; COMMISSIONER OF
    CORRECTION OF MARYLAND; STATE ADMINISTRATION
    BOARD OF ELECTION LAWS; UNKNOWN MEDICAL CONTRACTOR AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS; BRYANT K.
    HOWARD, P.A.; DOCTOR ASHBY, M.D.; UNKNOWN
    NURSES; MS. JOHNSON,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA95-159-S)
    Submitted:

    March 21, 1996

    Decided:

    April 2, 1996

    Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Robert Leon Buckner, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley J. Schapiro, Linda


    T. Cox, COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Towson, Maryland; John Joseph
    Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Richard M. Kastendieck, 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:
    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying
    relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (1988) 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. Buckner v. Governor of Maryland, No. CA-95-159-S (D. Md.
    June 19, 1995). We deny Appellant's motion to appoint counsel and
    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