Trolinger v. Henry

Fourth Circuit

Trolinger v. Henry

234 F. App'x 147

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided July 25, 2007·No. No. 07-6269·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

William P. Trolinger appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his challenge to the application of 42 U.S.C. § 14135a (West 2005 & Supp.2007) and the order denying in part his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in for-ma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Trolinger v. Henry, No. 1:06-cv-01551-WMN (D. Md. Dec. 20, 2006; Jan. 31, 2007). 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:

William P. Trolinger appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his challenge to the application of 42 U.S.C. § 14135a (West 2005 & Supp.2007) and the order denying in part his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in for-ma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Trolinger v. Henry, No. 1:06-cv-01551-WMN (D. Md. Dec. 20, 2006; Jan. 31, 2007). 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.

Trolinger v. Henry, 234 F. App'x 147 (4th Cir. 2007).

Pincite

234 F. App'x 147 (Trolinger v. Henry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related