0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views2 pages

Terry Wendell Copeland v. William L. Smith, Warden Lieutenant Woods Karen Trennepohl Lieutenant Ratcliff, Institutional Coordinator, 17 F.3d 1433, 4th Cir. (1994)

Terry Copeland, an inmate, filed a 42 U.S.C. 1983 civil rights complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Copeland appealed pro se. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial without merit, agreeing that the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented and that oral arguments would not aid the decision. The appeals court cited the district court's reasoning and affirmed its ruling.
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
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views2 pages

Terry Wendell Copeland v. William L. Smith, Warden Lieutenant Woods Karen Trennepohl Lieutenant Ratcliff, Institutional Coordinator, 17 F.3d 1433, 4th Cir. (1994)

Terry Copeland, an inmate, filed a 42 U.S.C. 1983 civil rights complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Copeland appealed pro se. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial without merit, agreeing that the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented and that oral arguments would not aid the decision. The appeals court cited the district court's reasoning and affirmed its ruling.
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

17 F.

3d 1433
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished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of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the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.

Terry Wendell COPELAND, Plaintiff-Appellant,


v.
William L. SMITH, Warden; Lieutenant Woods; Karen
Trennepohl; Lieutenant Ratcliff, Institutional
Coordinator, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 93-6116.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


Jan. 10, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland,
at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA-93-118-S).
Terry Wendell Copeland, appellant pro se.
D.Md.
AFFIRMED.
Before HALL and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior
Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. 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. Copeland v. Smith, No. CA-93-118-S (D.
Md. Jan. 22, 1993). 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