U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1991

Holsey v. Carter

Holsey v. Carter
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided November 15, 1991
948 F.2d 1281; 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 31822; 1991 WL 237810 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Holsey v. Carter

Opinion

948 F.2d 1281

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Aaron HOLSEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Leroy CARTER, Individually and as a Former Sergeant at the
Maryland Penitentiary; Hendricks, Individually and as a
Sergeant Assigned to the MD Penitentiary located at
Baltimore, Maryland; C. Johnson, Individually and as a
Sergeant Assigned to the MD Penitentiary located at
Baltimore, MD; J.S. Smith, Individually and as Correctional
Officer Assigned to the MD Penitentiary; A.W. Turner,
Individually and as a Correctional Officer assigned to the
MD Penitentiary, Defendants-Appellees,
and
W. Johnson, Individually and as a Former Correctional
Officer of the MD Penitentiary, Defendant.

No. 91-6652.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Oct. 28, 1991.
Decided Nov. 15, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frank A. Kaufman, Senior District Judge. (CA-79-585-K)

Aaron Holsey, appellant pro se.

John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Ronald Mark Levitan, Assistant Attorney General, Carmina Szunyog, Baltimore, Md., for appellees.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, SPROUSE, Circuit Judge, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Aaron Holsey appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) on Holsey's claims against Appellees. 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. Holsey v. Carter, No. CA-79-585-K (D.Md. Sept. 26, 1991). 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.

2

AFFIRMED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.