Thompson B. Hawkins-El v. Paul Davis, Chairman, Maryland Parole Commission

966 F.2d 1442, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 21665, 1992 WL 132528
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJune 16, 1992
Docket92-6410
StatusUnpublished

This text of 966 F.2d 1442 (Thompson B. Hawkins-El v. Paul Davis, Chairman, Maryland Parole Commission) 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
Thompson B. Hawkins-El v. Paul Davis, Chairman, Maryland Parole Commission, 966 F.2d 1442, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 21665, 1992 WL 132528 (4th Cir. 1992).

Opinion

966 F.2d 1442

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Thompson B. HAWKINS-EL, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Paul DAVIS, Chairman, Maryland Parole Commission, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 92-6410.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 1, 1992
Decided: June 16, 1992

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CA-91-3602-K)

Thompson B. Hawkins-El, Appellant Pro Se.

George Albert Eichhorn, III, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before PHILLIPS, WILKINSON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Thompson B. Hawkins-El appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988). 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.* Hawkins-El v. Davis, No. CA-91-3602-K (D. Md. Mar. 19, 1992). 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

*

We note that Hawkins-El's claim for injunctive relief in addition to damages is moot, because he was paroled during the pendency of this appeal

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
966 F.2d 1442, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 21665, 1992 WL 132528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompson-b-hawkins-el-v-paul-davis-chairman-maryla-ca4-1992.