Moore v. Smith

Fourth Circuit

Moore v. Smith

235 F. App'x 197

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 28, 2007·No. No. 06-7936·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Donnie Speller Moore appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Moore v. Smith, 1:06-cv-00911-JFM (D.Md. Oct. 31, 2006). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argu[198]*198merit would not aid in the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM:

Donnie Speller Moore appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Moore v. Smith, 1:06-cv-00911-JFM (D.Md. Oct. 31, 2006). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argu[198]*198merit would not aid in the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Moore v. Smith, 235 F. App'x 197 (4th Cir. 2007).

Pincite

235 F. App'x 197 (Moore v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related