Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Thorton v. State of Maryland, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views3 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Starling Thorton under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the State of Maryland and other defendants. The district court denied relief to Thorton and the appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-07-01 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-6301

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Starling Thorton under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the State of Maryland and other defendants. The district court denied relief to Thorton and the appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    0 views3 pages

    Thorton v. State of Maryland, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Starling Thorton under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the State of Maryland and other defendants. The district court denied relief to Thorton and the appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 96-6301

    STARLING THORTON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    and
    WINSTON LLOYD,
    Plaintiff,
    versus
    STATE OF MARYLAND; RONALD MOATS, Warden;
    PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MARYLAND, RICHARD
    LANHAM, Commissioner of Corrections,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. M. J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-953990-MJG)
    Submitted:

    June 20, 1996

    Decided:

    July 1, 1996

    Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Starling Thorton, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying
    relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed
    the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible
    error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
    court. Thorton v. Maryland, No. CA-95-3990-MJG (D. Md. Feb. 1,
    1996). 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

    You might also like