Mulazim v. Angelone

Fourth Circuit

Mulazim v. Angelone

76 F. App'x 498

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Mulazim v. Angelone. Read the opinion of the Court — 50 F. App'x 635 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 24, 2003·No. 03-6801·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Ahoto Taysir Mulazim 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 Mulazim v. Angelone, No. CA-02-1135-7 (W.D.Va. Apr. 24, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented *499 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.

Ahoto Taysir Mulazim 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 Mulazim v. Angelone, No. CA-02-1135-7 (W.D.Va. Apr. 24, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented *499 in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Mulazim v. Angelone, 76 F. App'x 498 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

76 F. App'x 498 (Mulazim v. Angelone) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related