Bowler v. State of Maine

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit·Decided December 29, 1992·No. 92-1830·Published

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion


December 29, 1992
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

____________________

No. 92-1830

EUGENE B. BOWLER,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF MAINE,

Defendant, Appellee.

____________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge]
___________________

____________________

Before

Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Torruella and Selya, Circuit Judges.
______________

____________________

Eugene B. Bowler on brief pro se.
________________
Michel E. Carpenter, Attorney General, Phyllis Gardiner,
______________________ _________________
Assistant Attorney General, and Thomas D. Warren, Deputy Attorney
_________________
General, on brief for appellee.
____________________

____________________

Per Curiam. For the reasons cited by the Magistrate
__________

Judge in his Recommended Decision of May 26, 1992, and in

accordance with the Supreme Court's intervening discussion in

New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408, 2417-20 (1992)
_________ _____________

(Tenth Amendment); id. at 2432-33 (Guarantee Clause), we
___

affirm the judgment of the district court.

Affirmed.
_________

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bowler v. State of Maine, (1st Cir. 1992).

Bowler v. State of Maine (Bowler v. State of Maine) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

New York v. United States
505 U.S. 144 (Supreme Court, 1992)