Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Furtado v. Vaugheys, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    Edson Furtado filed a § 1983 complaint against a Maryland judge and the state of Maryland which was denied by the district court. Furtado appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying Furtado's motion for appointment of counsel and affirming the district court's ruling. The court stated that the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the materials and no oral argument was necessary.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2008-04-30 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 08-6266

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Edson Furtado filed a § 1983 complaint against a Maryland judge and the state of Maryland which was denied by the district court. Furtado appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying Furtado's motion for appointment of counsel and affirming the district court's ruling. The court stated that the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the materials and no oral argument was necessary.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    1 views2 pages

    Furtado v. Vaugheys, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Edson Furtado filed a § 1983 complaint against a Maryland judge and the state of Maryland which was denied by the district court. Furtado appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, denying Furtado's motion for appointment of counsel and affirming the district court's ruling. The court stated that the facts and legal arguments were adequately explained in the materials and no oral argument was necessary.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 08-6266

    EDSON FURTADO,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    CORNELIUS J. VAUGHEYS, Judge; STATE OF MARYLAND,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:07-cv03251-RWT)

    Submitted:

    April 24, 2008

    Decided:

    April 30, 2008

    Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit
    Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Edson Furtado, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Edson Furtado appeals the district courts order denying
    relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.
    the record and find no reversible error.

    We have reviewed

    Accordingly, we deny

    Furtados motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the


    reasons stated by the district court.

    Furtado v. Vaugheys, No.

    8:07-cv-03251-RWT (D. Md. Jan. 31, 2008).

    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like