Buckner v. Governor of Maryland

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7051

ROBERT LEON BUCKNER,

Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND; BALTIMORE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; BALTIMORE CITY

POLICE DEPARTMENT; ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; BALTIMORE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPART- MENT; ARCHIE GEE, Warden, Patuxent Institu- tion; KEITH GREENE, Officer, DOC Office,

Patuxent; JAMES M. DEAN, Warden, Baltimore

County Detention Center; COMMISSIONER OF

CORRECTION OF MARYLAND; STATE ADMINISTRATION BOARD OF ELECTION LAWS; UNKNOWN MEDICAL CON- TRACTOR AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS; BRYANT K.

HOWARD, P.A.; DOCTOR ASHBY, M.D.; UNKNOWN

NURSES; MS. JOHNSON,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 95-159-S)

Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 2, 1996

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Leon Buckner, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley J. Schapiro, Linda T. Cox, COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Towson, Maryland; John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Richard M. Kastendieck, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) 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. Buckner v. Governor of Maryland, No. CA-95-159-S (D. Md. June 19, 1995). We deny Appellant's motion to appoint counsel and 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