Ramarro L. Smith v. Rae A. Reighard, Case Worker, Maryland Correctional Institute

Fourth Circuit

Ramarro L. Smith v. Rae A. Reighard, Case Worker, Maryland Correctional Institute

14 F.3d 596, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 5009, 1994 WL 12046

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 20, 1994

Docket93-7144

StatusPublished

This text of 14 F.3d 596 (Ramarro L. Smith v. Rae A. Reighard, Case Worker, Maryland Correctional Institute) 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

Ramarro L. Smith v. Rae A. Reighard, Case Worker, Maryland Correctional Institute, 14 F.3d 596, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 5009, 1994 WL 12046 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

14 F.3d 596
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Ramarro L. SMITH, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Rae A. REIGHARD, Case Worker, Maryland Correctional
Institute, Defendant Appellee.

No. 93-7144.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 16, 1993.
Decided Jan. 20, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. M.J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-93-1432-MJG)

Ramarro L. Smith, appellant pro se.

Audrey J. S. Carrion, Office of the Atty. Gen. of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, for appellee.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before HALL and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. 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. Smith v. Reighard, No. CA-93-1432-MJG (D. Md. Oct. 7, 1993). 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.

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

14 F.3d 596
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished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.

Ramarro L. SMITH, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Rae A. REIGHARD, Case Worker, Maryland Correctional
Institute, Defendant Appellee.

No. 93-7144.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 16, 1993.
Decided Jan. 20, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. M.J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-93-1432-MJG)

Ramarro L. Smith, appellant pro se.

Audrey J. S. Carrion, Office of the Atty. Gen. of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, for appellee.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before HALL and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. 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. Smith v. Reighard, No. CA-93-1432-MJG (D. Md. Oct. 7, 1993). 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 F.3d 596, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 5009, 1994 WL 12046, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ramarro-l-smith-v-rae-a-reighard-case-worker-maryl-ca4-1994.