Scribd
Upload
9 views2 pages

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

The document is a court opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of Michael Rankins v. Sewall Smith et al. In a per curiam opinion, the Fourth Circuit affirms the district court's denial of relief to Michael Rankins under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, finding the appeal to be without merit. The Fourth Circuit adopts the reasoning of the district court in its April 6, 1992 opinion.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
9 views2 pages

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

The document is a court opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of Michael Rankins v. Sewall Smith et al. In a per curiam opinion, the Fourth Circuit affirms the district court's denial of relief to Michael Rankins under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, finding the appeal to be without merit. The Fourth Circuit adopts the reasoning of the district court in its April 6, 1992 opinion.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

966 F.

2d 1443

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
Circuit.
Michael RANKINS, a/k/a Abdul S. Muhammad, PlaintiffAppellant,
v.
Sewall SMITH, Acting Warden; Maurice Middleton, Acting
Major; William D. Filbert, Jr., Warden,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 92-6448.

United States Court of Appeals,


Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 1, 1992
Decided: June 11, 1992

Michael Rankins, Appellant Pro Se.


Audrey J. S. Carrion, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before PHILLIPS, WILKINSON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

OPINION
1

Michael Rankins appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42
U.S.C. 1983 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion
discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the
reasoning of the district court. Rankins v. Smith, No. CA-91-3050-K (D. Md.
Apr. 6, 1992). 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