The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
00-6981•Bryant Keith Belle v. Commissioner of Correction
00-6981Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitSep 29, 2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6981
BRYANT KEITH BELLE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION; MARYLAND STATE
POLICE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge.
(CA-99-3621-WMN)
Submitted: September 21, 2000 Decided: September 29, 2000
Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bryant Keith Belle, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,
Attorney General, Glenn William Bell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GEN-
ERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Bryant Keith Belle appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) 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. See Belle v. Commissioner of Correction, No.
CA-99-3621-WMN (D. Md. June 28, 2000). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.