Terry Wendell Copeland v. William L. Smith, Warden Lieutenant Woods Karen Trennepohl Lieutenant Ratcliff, Institutional Coordinator

Fourth Circuit

Terry Wendell Copeland v. William L. Smith, Warden Lieutenant Woods Karen Trennepohl Lieutenant Ratcliff, Institutional Coordinator

17 F.3d 1433, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 12178, 1994 WL 5116

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 10, 1994

Docket93-6116

StatusPublished

This text of 17 F.3d 1433 (Terry Wendell Copeland v. William L. Smith, Warden Lieutenant Woods Karen Trennepohl Lieutenant Ratcliff, Institutional Coordinator) 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

Terry Wendell Copeland v. William L. Smith, Warden Lieutenant Woods Karen Trennepohl Lieutenant Ratcliff, Institutional Coordinator, 17 F.3d 1433, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 12178, 1994 WL 5116 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

17 F.3d 1433
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Terry Wendell COPELAND, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
William L. SMITH, Warden; Lieutenant Woods; Karen
Trennepohl; Lieutenant Ratcliff, Institutional
Coordinator, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 93-6116.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Jan. 10, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA-93-118-S).

Terry Wendell Copeland, appellant pro se.

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. Copeland v. Smith, No. CA-93-118-S (D. Md. Jan. 22, 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

17 F.3d 1433
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.

Terry Wendell COPELAND, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
William L. SMITH, Warden; Lieutenant Woods; Karen
Trennepohl; Lieutenant Ratcliff, Institutional
Coordinator, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 93-6116.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Jan. 10, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA-93-118-S).

Terry Wendell Copeland, appellant pro se.

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. Copeland v. Smith, No. CA-93-118-S (D. Md. Jan. 22, 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)

17 F.3d 1433, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 12178, 1994 WL 5116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/terry-wendell-copeland-v-william-l-smith-warden-li-ca4-1994.