Ralph Alexander v. State of Maryland Commissioner of Correction Warden, Maryland State Penitentiary Ernestine Williams, Office Supervisor II

879 F.2d 862, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 10249, 1989 WL 79733
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJuly 18, 1989
Docket88-6617
StatusUnpublished

This text of 879 F.2d 862 (Ralph Alexander v. State of Maryland Commissioner of Correction Warden, Maryland State Penitentiary Ernestine Williams, Office Supervisor II) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ralph Alexander v. State of Maryland Commissioner of Correction Warden, Maryland State Penitentiary Ernestine Williams, Office Supervisor II, 879 F.2d 862, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 10249, 1989 WL 79733 (4th Cir. 1989).

Opinion

879 F.2d 862
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Ralph ALEXANDER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
STATE OF MARYLAND; Commissioner of Correction; Warden,
Maryland State Penitentiary; Ernestine Williams,
Office Supervisor II, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 88-6617.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 9, 1989.
Decided: July 18, 1989.

Ralph Alexander, appellant pro se.

John Joseph Curran, Jr., Karen U. Smith (Office of the Attorney General), for appellees.

Before K.K. HALL and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Ralph Alexander appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Alexander v. State of Maryland, C/A No. 87-3192-S (D.Md. April 5, 1988). 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
879 F.2d 862, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 10249, 1989 WL 79733, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ralph-alexander-v-state-of-maryland-commissioner-of-correction-warden-ca4-1989.