Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Briscoe v. Smith, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. John Francis Briscoe filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various Maryland state officials which was denied by the district court. The appeals court reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the denial of relief to Briscoe. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the materials provided to the court. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's decision to deny Briscoe's complaint.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-11-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-7064

    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 summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. John Francis Briscoe filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various Maryland state officials which was denied by the district court. The appeals court reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the denial of relief to Briscoe. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the materials provided to the court. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's decision to deny Briscoe's complaint.

    Copyright:

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

    Briscoe v. Smith, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. John Francis Briscoe filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various Maryland state officials which was denied by the district court. The appeals court reviewed the record and affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error in the denial of relief to Briscoe. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the materials provided to the court. The appeals court affirmed the lower court's decision to deny Briscoe's complaint.

    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. 96-7064

    JOHN FRANCIS BRISCOE,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    WILLIAM SMITH, Warden; PARRIS N. GLENDENING,
    Governor; KATHLEEN K. TOWNSEND, Lieutenant
    Governor; BISHOP L. ROBINSON, Secretary of
    Public Safety; RICHARD LANHAM, Parole Commissioner; PAUL DAVIS, Deputy Commissioner; DAN
    D. ZACCOGNINI, Commissioner; MICHAEL BLOUNT,
    Commissioner,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA95-2791-DKC)
    Submitted:

    October 31, 1997

    Decided:

    November 14, 1997

    Before HAMILTON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior


    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    John Francis Briscoe, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on
    his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (1994) 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.
    Briscoe v. Smith, No. CA-95-2791-DKC (D. Md. June 7, 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