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)
01-7957•Mark Anthony Cunningham v. GREGORY BORIS, Police Officer
01-7957Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 9, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7957
MARK ANTHONY CUNNINGHAM,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
GREGORY BORIS, Police Officer; PHILLIP CHAPIN,
Police Officer; MICHAEL WINGLER, Police
Sergeant; SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF BALTIMORE CITY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, Chief District Judge.
(CA-01-247)
Submitted: April 26, 2002 Decided: May 9, 2002
Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mark Anthony Cunningham, Appellant Pro Se. Robert D. Anbinder,
OFFICE OF THE CITY SOLICITOR, Baltimore, Maryland; Charles Grant
Byrd, Jr., BROWN, ALSTON & BYRD, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Mark Anthony Cunningham appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001)
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. Cunningham v. Boris, No. CA-
01-247 (D. Md. Oct. 19, 2001). 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.