Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Jones v. Plazio, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a 3-sentence unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of relief to Nicholas Warner Jones on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The court reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error, affirming the lower court's ruling based on the reasoning in its June 16, 1998 opinion. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Jones v. Plazio, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    This document is a 3-sentence unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of relief to Nicholas Warner Jones on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The court reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error, affirming the lower court's ruling based on the reasoning in its June 16, 1998 opinion. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-10-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 98-6929

    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    This document is a 3-sentence unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of relief to Nicholas Warner Jones on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The court reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error, affirming the lower court's ruling based on the reasoning in its June 16, 1998 opinion. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments 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
    8 views2 pages

    Jones v. Plazio, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a 3-sentence unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the district court's denial of relief to Nicholas Warner Jones on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The court reviewed the record and district court opinion and found no reversible error, affirming the lower court's ruling based on the reasoning in its June 16, 1998 opinion. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments 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. 98-6929

    NICHOLAS WARNER JONES, a/k/a Charles Jones,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    NICK PLAZIO, Detective; FRANK
    ANITA SMITH, DOC Case Manager,

    WEATHERSBEE;
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-981764)

    Submitted:

    September 30, 1998

    Decided:

    October 20, 1998

    Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Nicholas Warner Jones, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Nicholas Warner Jones appeals from the district courts order
    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the
    reasoning of the district court. Jones v. Plazio, No. CA-98-1764
    (D. Md. June 16, 1998). 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