McLaughlin-Cox v. Maryland Parole Commission

Fourth Circuit

McLaughlin-Cox v. Maryland Parole Commission

85 F. App'x 903

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 16, 2004·No. No. 03-7415·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

John McLaughlin-Cox appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See McLaughlin-Cox v. Maryland Parole Comm’n, No. CA-02-4204-MJG (D.Md. Aug. 15, 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:

John McLaughlin-Cox appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See McLaughlin-Cox v. Maryland Parole Comm’n, No. CA-02-4204-MJG (D.Md. Aug. 15, 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

McLaughlin-Cox v. Maryland Parole Commission, 85 F. App'x 903 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

85 F. App'x 903 (McLaughlin-Cox v. Maryland Parole Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related