Calhoun-El v. Smith

Fourth Circuit

Calhoun-El v. Smith

94 F. App'x 183

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 15, 2004·No. No. 03-6972·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

James Calhoun-El appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint, denying his motion to amend the pleadings, and denying his motion for appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See English v. Smith, No. CA-02-2729 (D. Md. filed June 3, 2003; entered June 4, 2003). 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

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

PER CURIAM:

James Calhoun-El appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint, denying his motion to amend the pleadings, and denying his motion for appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See English v. Smith, No. CA-02-2729 (D. Md. filed June 3, 2003; entered June 4, 2003). 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

Calhoun-El v. Smith, 94 F. App'x 183 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

94 F. App'x 183 (Calhoun-El v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related