Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Johnson v. Wiley, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Kenard E. Johnson filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against two police officers alleging civil rights violations. The district court denied relief and Johnson appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision. The appeals court denied Johnson's motion for appointment of counsel and dispensed with oral argument, determining 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

    You might also like

    Johnson v. Wiley, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    Kenard E. Johnson filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against two police officers alleging civil rights violations. The district court denied relief and Johnson appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision. The appeals court denied Johnson's motion for appointment of counsel and dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-05-04 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-7840

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Kenard E. Johnson filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against two police officers alleging civil rights violations. The district court denied relief and Johnson appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision. The appeals court denied Johnson's motion for appointment of counsel and dispensed with oral argument, determining 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
    8 views2 pages

    Johnson v. Wiley, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Kenard E. Johnson filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against two police officers alleging civil rights violations. The district court denied relief and Johnson appealed. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's decision. The appeals court denied Johnson's motion for appointment of counsel and dispensed with oral argument, determining 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. 05-7840

    KENARD E. JOHNSON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    L. WILEY, Detective,
    WYNE, ID No. 740,

    ID

    No.

    447;

    SERGEANT
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (CA-051865-RWT)

    Submitted: April 27, 2006

    Decided: May 4, 2006

    Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Kenard E. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Patricia Prestigiacomo Via,


    Assistant County Attorney, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

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

    for

    the

    reasons

    stated

    by

    the

    We have

    Accordingly, we

    district

    court.

    Johnson v. Wiley, No. CA-05-1865-RWT (D. Md. Nov. 14, 2005).

    See
    We

    deny Johnsons motion for appointment of counsel. 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