Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Salaam-X v. Pendergraph, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Dominique Muhammad Salaam-X on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for denying relief. The Court also denied Salaam-X's motion for oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-06-19 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-6559

    Original Title

    Salaam-x v. Pendergraph, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Dominique Muhammad Salaam-X on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for denying relief. The Court also denied Salaam-X's motion for oral argument, finding 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
    1 views2 pages

    Salaam-X v. Pendergraph, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Dominique Muhammad Salaam-X on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for denying relief. The Court also denied Salaam-X's motion for oral argument, finding 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 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-6559

    DOMINIQUE MUHAMMAD SALAAM-X, a/k/a Alfred D.


    Clifton,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    JIM PENDERGRAPH; N. CARTER, Deputy Sheriff,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-03-37-3-MU-02)

    Submitted:

    June 12, 2003

    Decided:

    June 19, 2003

    Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Dominique Muhammad Salaam-X, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Dominique Muhammad Salaam-X appeals the district courts order
    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.

    We have

    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we

    affirm on the reasoning of the district court.

    See Salaam-X v.

    Pendergraph, No. CA-03-37-3-MU-02 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 18, 2003).

    We

    deny Salaam-Xs motion for 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