Pearson v. Saar

Fourth Circuit

Pearson v. Saar

76 F. App'x 504

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 24, 2003·No. 03-7004·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Demetric Gray Pearson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Pearson’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Pearson v. Saar, Nos. CA-03-1495-RDB, CA-03-1496-RDB (D. Md. filed June 16, 2003 & entered June 17, 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.

Demetric Gray Pearson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Pearson’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Pearson v. Saar, Nos. CA-03-1495-RDB, CA-03-1496-RDB (D. Md. filed June 16, 2003 & entered June 17, 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.

Pearson v. Saar, 76 F. App'x 504 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

76 F. App'x 504 (Pearson v. Saar) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related