Wilson v. Glendening

Fourth Circuit

Wilson v. Glendening

56 F. App'x 189

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 27, 2003·No. No. 02-7840·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant inmates appeal the district court’s order denying relief on their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Appellants’ motion for appointment of counsel and affirm the dismissal of their complaint [190] for the reasons stated by the district court. See Wilson v. Glendening, No. CA-02-3514-S (D.Md. Nov. 14, 2002). 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.

The appellant inmates appeal the district court’s order denying relief on their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Appellants’ motion for appointment of counsel and affirm the dismissal of their complaint [190] for the reasons stated by the district court. See Wilson v. Glendening, No. CA-02-3514-S (D.Md. Nov. 14, 2002). 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.

Wilson v. Glendening, 56 F. App'x 189 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

56 F. App'x 189 (Wilson v. Glendening) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related