U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1998

Hester v. Stowe

Hester v. Stowe
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided May 21, 1998

Hester v. Stowe

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7695

STEVEN E. HESTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

STEVEN STOWE (F.B.I.); ED RYAN (F.B.I.); PAT- RICK MCNARDO (U.S.M.); SCOTT SEWALL (U.S.M.); OFFICER SWEET (AA County Police); BEN WILSON (B.C.D.C); VENABLE, Social Worker, B.C.D.C., Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-95- 2300-AMD)

Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: May 21, 1998

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

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven E. Hester, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, United States Attorney, Perry F. Sekus, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTOR- NEY, Baltimore, Maryland; John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney Gener- al, Amy Kushner Kline, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 (1994) 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. Hester v. Stowe, No. CA-95-2300-AMD (D. Md. Oct. 1, 1996).

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* Appellant also brought claims under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

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